[0:01] [Music]
[0:26] [Music]
[0:47] [Music]
[1:31] [Music]
[1:40] [Music]
[1:46] [Music]
[2:30] he
[2:33] [Music]
[3:44] [Music]
[4:02] [Music]
[4:36] [Music]
[4:55] [Music]
[5:01] [Music]
[5:19] Council committee meeting for uh Tuesday
[5:22] February 20th
[5:23] 20124 um I'd like to uh call City
[5:27] development planning first then we'll
[5:29] recess because uh Mrs Carver has a uh
[5:33] training that she needs to go to all
[5:35] right so like
[5:42] plan good
[5:44] evening um since we last reported on our
[5:48] arpa for our arpa updates COC house
[5:52] contract is complete and pending review
[5:54] from the mayor's office as well as bcn's
[5:58] contract um still pending some of the
[6:01] pre-contractual requirements are the w y
[6:05] YMCA Harbor House and Electric City
[6:08] Co-Op Electric City Co-Op is 95% there
[6:12] they just don't have sight control yet
[6:14] so um more information to come with that
[6:18] um Miracle on Craig um is still
[6:21] currently in the hands of Corporation
[6:23] Council I don't know if Maxine has a
[6:25] update on where we are um it has been
[6:28] deposited for recording today um it will
[6:30] take about a week or two for us to get
[6:32] confirmation of
[6:35] preparation thank you um the bees the
[6:37] house um we are still waiting
[6:40] for a decision from City Council on
[6:44] their additional ARA fund request of
[6:48] 400,000 um the same for
[6:51] YMCA they are asking for the 100,000 to
[6:54] support the black and Latinos Achievers
[6:57] program we also have pending the YWCA
[7:01] who asks for additional arpa funds of
[7:04] 1.5
[7:06] million um as of February 16th um our
[7:11] affirmative action officer has asked um
[7:14] to make a change with the arpa funds for
[7:17] the Empowerment Center he would like
[7:19] that to go towards
[7:20] programming um so I'm not sure if I
[7:22] should move forward with the legislative
[7:24] request um to city council but I did put
[7:27] it on here just for items to discuss
[7:31] and last but not least is the create
[7:33] Studios um received the email um from
[7:37] city council president asking me to do
[7:39] some research on an application um that
[7:41] was deemed lost so we were able to
[7:43] retrieve that application and now we're
[7:45] waiting for an updated application with
[7:48] current dates current budget to submit
[7:50] to city council for
[7:54] consideration all right all right um so
[7:57] we some of the stuff we covered like the
[7:59] Y Ember asked for the 100,000 we talked
[8:02] about the fact that we don't have we
[8:03] don't have 100,000 left for that so um I
[8:07] I at the time I asked the mayor if we
[8:08] need to just write a letter back but our
[8:09] decision on that was that we're going to
[8:12] be going to we're going to be coming to
[8:13] you with this that our decision on that
[8:14] was that we would just send them a
[8:16] letter and say we don't have the money
[8:19] um but please you know provide
[8:20] additional information is what Mr moodar
[8:22] said he would like to hear about about
[8:24] their program um the Bethesda house we
[8:27] we talked about it but we have we have
[8:29] to come to you Miss Carver that our
[8:30] meeting was on Thursday to um to follow
[8:33] up with all the different different
[8:34] things that we
[8:35] need and the same goes with the Y WCA
[8:40] and duri this is our
[8:42] first hearing about this uh
[8:46] so it's about what's one 1 million
[8:50] something there asking for the entire
[8:52] thing to go to program so I think that's
[8:56] something for more discussion we'd have
[8:58] to look at their appli
[9:00] that is Dury's
[9:01] application it is empowerment
[9:03] application that was combined with Dury
[9:06] but they want all the money to go to the
[9:07] programming mhm which D's money already
[9:10] is allocated for programming and so
[9:12] programming
[9:15] for um that was not all the way clear in
[9:18] the
[9:19] application dar's application um was
[9:23] really about construction um fixing part
[9:27] of their property it wasn't programming
[9:30] but somewhere along the lines these
[9:32] applications got intertwined with each
[9:38] other or me any more clarity is Patrick
[9:41] I thought that the um part of the grant
[9:44] that was um the Empowerment Center was
[9:47] um I didn't get that it was construction
[9:48] I thought we were looking to actually
[9:50] have a building let let me clar clarify
[9:53] D's original ARA application not
[9:57] Empowerment Center D apply for arpa
[9:59] fundings right to fix up property that
[10:02] they own to offer
[10:05] services right to offer some programming
[10:08] Services somewhere in
[10:10] between these applications they got
[10:12] combined and D was assigned to offer the
[10:15] programming for Empowerment Center okay
[10:19] so the piece that is um the uh 88 Albany
[10:24] Street is off the table then it sounds
[10:27] like he's he's asking to to move
[10:31] forward from that property so I'm not
[10:35] clear on but I guess um I guess the
[10:37] mayor could speak more about what
[10:39] happened with the Empowerment
[10:40] Center it's not formally off the table
[10:44] yet but just the cost estimates are too
[10:47] high so there has not been a formal
[10:49] decision
[10:51] on how you would do the conceptual
[10:54] delivery of services if you don't have
[10:57] that building and some of the last
[10:59] discussions were uh is the ability to
[11:03] maybe move some of that into the Miracle
[11:06] on Craig concept now that is shifted and
[11:10] so I would still treat it as a dynamic
[11:12] review on how
[11:15] to preserve some of those things
[11:17] conceptually and then actually be able
[11:19] to implement them
[11:21] within uh physical space that we
[11:25] have but right now we don't have
[11:27] physical space forre anything correct
[11:30] you your well in
[11:31] [Music]
[11:33] those pre-identified sites there may be
[11:37] other things that you could work at the
[11:38] community college it's complimenting
[11:41] some stuff the seat Center does the
[11:42] school district has some program that
[11:45] they're doing and so I don't
[11:47] preclude ongoing discussions with any of
[11:50] those entities to see what we can do
[11:53] that gives us the most value for the
[11:55] dollars I think that the idea of the
[11:57] Empowerment Center was trying to kind to
[11:59] take take over what map used to do and
[12:02] keep it keep it kind of neighborhood
[12:03] based which so everything you talked
[12:05] about is like so people would have to
[12:07] like um you know go outside of that so I
[12:10] think that was part of the reasoning
[12:12] behind the um Empowerment Center did you
[12:14] have your hand up M yeah was just saying
[12:15] I I understand that kind of the merging
[12:17] of these two projects was because there
[12:19] was some alignment and kind of what they
[12:21] you know wanted to offer um now being
[12:24] that um well I guess we'd have to just
[12:27] wait for more clarity as to where the
[12:28] Empowerment Center is so that we can
[12:30] make a more informed decision on how to
[12:32] move forward I just think about how the
[12:38] Empowerment Center not was not being
[12:41] exactly clear as to what the next steps
[12:42] are how does that impact a and should we
[12:45] look at maybe separating the two or
[12:48] maybe kind of to what the mayor was
[12:49] saying we look at maybe even encouraging
[12:52] a third even fourth partner to kind of
[12:54] fill fill Gap I was just wondering you
[12:56] know what we think about that and if I
[13:00] may add um Madam president when we heard
[13:03] from our affirmative action officer at
[13:05] the last meeting he did present that we
[13:07] are doing some of the programming um
[13:10] currently it is funded with cdbg G funds
[13:13] and it is not enough so we are we do
[13:16] have a deficit between the program that
[13:18] we're offering what those expenses are
[13:20] and what the affirmative action office
[13:22] um was allotted for this calendar year
[13:26] okay so the deficit and program fund
[13:29] from cdbg
[13:33] correct so they took a hit they applied
[13:35] for
[13:37] 37,500 they were awarded 20,000 and that
[13:40] was supposed to cover rental space for
[13:42] the program for the construction class
[13:44] we he also has the um
[13:48] janitronics program so we're already
[13:51] over we've already um overspent
[13:56] okay but I think we still need some
[13:58] clarity in
[13:59] in terms of what Mr wants to forward
[14:02] that information right everyone have
[14:05] other questions about that oh oh no okay
[14:09] all right so we can do that and um I'll
[14:11] send you an email on all the things we
[14:12] discussed okay thank you the one last
[14:15] thing though everyone oh is about create
[14:18] I'll let you is about create their they
[14:21] did submit an
[14:22] application somehow it got lost in the
[14:24] very first round and they brought that
[14:27] to our attention or let me just be clear
[14:30] that was brought to the Detention of the
[14:32] Department of development uh pre Miss
[14:34] Harbor I'm not sure what happened so
[14:37] then they brought it forth again um they
[14:39] sent it to me I forwarded the email to
[14:41] miss carer so but at this point in time
[14:43] we know that we we really just lack
[14:47] funds to do that so um we're going to
[14:49] have to take a look at what's going to
[14:51] really be allocated and how that's how
[14:54] we can consider that because they
[14:55] definitely submitted their application
[14:57] on time put around but somehow it just
[15:00] didn't get moved
[15:05] forward all right so Mr Williams is
[15:07] first uh just a point of clarification I
[15:10] know the mayor uh briefly touched on the
[15:12] current status of the Miracle on CED
[15:13] Street project and just so ones on the
[15:15] same page I left our last special
[15:17] meeting with the understanding that
[15:19] there would still be time allotted to
[15:20] reach out to that perspective coalition
[15:22] to see if they can come and present
[15:24] their uh um I guess proposal proposal I
[15:27] just want to make sure we're still
[15:28] functioning with that understanding that
[15:30] we just re the department of development
[15:32] just received that letter today perfect
[15:34] so we weren't on the same page up until
[15:37] a couple of hours ago but we are now
[15:40] thank you m but um there was also
[15:42] another entity out there though that so
[15:44] there were two so the understanding was
[15:47] that both of those would then um be
[15:50] presenting a proposal for that
[15:51] particular
[15:52] building okay I we can probably talk to
[15:55] the mayor more about that
[15:57] okay thank you with that clarification
[16:00] yes M so the cdbg funding we're about to
[16:04] have the um first meeting I think right
[16:06] next week perhaps today
[16:09] what five minutes from now not five
[16:14] minutes
[16:15] um I just it'll be interesting to see
[16:19] you know whether some of these
[16:21] applications like I can't remember what
[16:22] the create one is actually for but you
[16:25] know whether some of these entities that
[16:28] unfortunately were unable to fund um I
[16:31] would think will'll probably be coming
[16:33] into your office through the cdbg um
[16:37] Avenue shortly they have RSVP okay yeah
[16:41] so it'll just be you know I think we
[16:43] need to all keep that in mind that um
[16:45] that ongoing annual pot of money um is
[16:50] about to launch as
[16:52] well this was for therapeutic art I did
[16:55] go back and read it after I got the
[16:56] email M so Mr tur I'm going to write on
[17:01] Miss Patrick that was my question okay
[17:03] as well just follow up on the the letter
[17:06] that you just mentioned is it a letter
[17:07] or a proposal you receive in regards to
[17:09] the mirical allocation um I guess it can
[17:12] serve as both it would need to be a
[17:14] proposal would need more information
[17:16] there's there's not a budget or anything
[17:18] but they're they're asking it's more
[17:21] like a coalition they want to have some
[17:23] rights to the decision making that will
[17:26] happen with Miracle on Craig
[17:29] but it's clear to them I I did make it
[17:30] clear that they would need to put a
[17:32] formal proposal forward so can we ask
[17:34] them because the time is of the Ence
[17:36] approaching uh March again we we
[17:39] literally just received that letter um
[17:41] today so I did um have a brief
[17:44] conversation with the mayor so I need to
[17:46] reach out and and schedule a meeting um
[17:49] with
[17:50] them so I will and ask for a proposal
[17:54] and have them come and present to city
[17:57] council but I don't I have to be and I
[17:59] don't know if I can meet with them
[18:00] before February 29th which was their ask
[18:04] okay all right Miss Brash you had a
[18:07] question uh yeah so the I mean the
[18:09] properties are
[18:11] being are reverting to the city since I
[18:15] recorded the Deeds are you talking about
[18:18] a proposal for a future yes okay I just
[18:21] wanted okay thank
[18:24] you anyone
[18:26] else no thank you thank you yes I
[18:30] appreciate you so we're going to um ad
[18:33] joury development planning and then well
[18:35] then we'll return to the agenda so may I
[18:36] have excuse me recess may I have a
[18:38] motion to recess second second Mr Mr M
[18:42] we all in favor we are recessed so I'd
[18:46] like to call to order Public Safety
[18:47] Committee we have five items on the
[18:49] agenda tonight the first of which is
[18:50] going to be the vehicle donation that's
[18:52] going to be spoken to by AC
[19:00] good evening I'm here tonight to ask for
[19:02] permission to receive a donation of a
[19:04] 2021 Ford Maki a fully electric vehicle
[19:07] from Metro Ford now the vehicle valued
[19:09] at
[19:10] $34,000 now the vehicle will be used by
[19:12] the connec police officers assigned as a
[19:14] community engagement officers located
[19:16] within the SKC school district and there
[19:18] are no matching funds
[19:20] required question other questions oh I'm
[19:23] sorry that's your that's your
[19:25] command have been fired
[19:29] any questions or comments I hearing on
[19:31] may have the motion so Mo second all in
[19:34] favor I thank you thank you the second
[19:37] item on the agenda tonight is a
[19:38] resolution support of the assembly and
[19:41] state bills Alpha
[19:42] 7652 Sierra 76 or
[19:46] 7546 establishing a school speed zone
[19:49] camera demonstration program in the city
[19:51] of s as many of you recognize this was a
[19:54] conversation brought forward by both uh
[19:56] myself and Mr palini uh this has been uh
[20:00] reintroduced back into the Senate uh and
[20:02] I made a note that it's currently
[20:04] forwarded to the transportation
[20:05] committee as of uh early January just
[20:08] wanted to make the council aware that
[20:10] this uh aspect in consideration is still
[20:12] moving
[20:13] forward so we'll continue to monitor
[20:15] that and keep the council aware of any
[20:19] updates right the next item on the
[20:21] agenda I'm
[20:24] sorry okay res so we're going to need to
[20:28] resubmit the resolution to support the
[20:30] the continued pushing through of that so
[20:32] may have a motion so move second second
[20:35] all those in favor I the next item on
[20:38] the agenda tonight is a resolution in
[20:40] support of assembly and state bills
[20:42] Alpha
[20:43] 7653 Sierra
[20:45] 7545 relating to the adjudications and
[20:48] owner liability for the violation of
[20:51] traffic control signal indications in
[20:53] the city of concy and in similar fashion
[20:55] this is uh the continuation of the bill
[20:57] that allows them to to actually bring
[20:59] forth a legal action to these
[21:01] individuals uh so we need to continue
[21:03] with another uh resolution for support I
[21:07] have a motion if there are any questions
[21:08] or concerns so Mo second alls in favor I
[21:12] I the next item on the agenda tonight is
[21:15] the cprb a sing police review board
[21:18] appointment letter for the Human Rights
[21:19] Commission and I'll be spoken to
[21:23] by and have uh name submitted to the
[21:27] Council of uh Anthony follower and
[21:30] Arthur Butler the Human Rights
[21:33] Commission
[21:37] perfect one second um before there are
[21:39] any questions or comments I did want to
[21:41] take advantage of the opportunity to
[21:42] just ask I keep hearing of an additional
[21:45] uh individual from the league of women's
[21:47] voters um just trying to make sure we're
[21:49] able to continue with a fully staff
[21:51] review board so I know if there was any
[21:53] underlying can you to review that the
[21:56] design and the alternate I'm sorry that
[21:59] sir continue to review moving those
[22:02] forward as you Mo in the alternate for
[22:04] the legal for ords
[22:10] correct um so do we do we have a
[22:13] timeline because I'm about the rest of
[22:14] I'm continually getting emails and phone
[22:16] calls about them un their inability to
[22:19] have a quorum um they as I spoke with
[22:22] you on the phone they their last meeting
[22:24] they had to cancel because of that
[22:26] moving some names forward which will
[22:27] give them
[22:30] I said the same thing they're like we
[22:32] like full
[22:33] body so um is there any timeline that
[22:37] you have uh at this point I
[22:41] don't oh and just as a point of
[22:44] clarification there's no nominations
[22:45] currently on the table their names have
[22:48] been submitted and continue to review
[22:49] them
[22:51] okay uh so here no further questions or
[22:54] comments um may please have a motion to
[22:56] move forward the two uh subit primary
[22:58] alternate from the Human Rights
[22:59] Commission so second all in favor hi uh
[23:04] the last point of discussion is to amend
[23:06] the chapter code 93 uh section six for
[23:10] the ATT liance holdovers and vacancies
[23:12] um Mr Williams I I provided the uh
[23:15] council with copies of the uh relevant
[23:18] portions of the city ordinance dealing
[23:20] with vacancies so so for Point of
[23:22] Departure for your discussions so uh um
[23:25] that those are the two re relevant
[23:28] portions 93.3 and
[23:31] 93-6 so if you want to have discussions
[23:34] on that and I can follow along and then
[23:36] whether I can help draft some proposed
[23:39] legislation regarding that as long as
[23:41] you have it in front of you rather than
[23:43] me kind of guessing what you all want
[23:46] so uh so I know from myself I've
[23:49] definitely reviewed this code uh
[23:51] significantly uh I don't know I don't
[23:53] want to rush any of the fellow council
[23:54] members uh just let me know what you're
[23:56] comfortable with uh I know for me
[23:58] specifically it was adding in the
[24:00] language uh to identify uh adding a
[24:03] timeline outside of the 60 days that an
[24:06] individual is noted pre their term
[24:09] ending and then applying an additional
[24:11] 30 days thereafter for the agencies to
[24:13] have to for a nomination or that um
[24:17] ability to replace that individual would
[24:18] come to the mayor he said that he was
[24:20] open to receiving candidates from any
[24:22] form of fashion uh in addition to
[24:25] writing in uh language specifically
[24:27] addressing the the opportunity for
[24:29] organizations to present altern
[24:35] alternates M so you're asking so I I
[24:38] there's a letter here from Miss uh from
[24:40] the chair of the cprb and so and she
[24:44] specifically says that that um if the
[24:47] organization fails to make the
[24:48] recommendation to the mayor that the
[24:50] organization will have forfeited their
[24:51] right so that's the ask of that then we
[24:54] then the mayor be able to with the um
[24:57] support of the council be able to to put
[24:59] another name forward is that the only
[25:02] change that they're asking for this time
[25:04] are that and the inclusion of the
[25:05] alternates but also making sure language
[25:07] reged that that did not forfeit that
[25:10] organization from RE submitting someone
[25:11] in the future that just meant for the
[25:13] duration of that individual's term they
[25:15] would lose that
[25:17] opportunity Miss Patrick and so I again
[25:19] I didn't get a chance to read this piece
[25:21] yet uh that we just got um does
[25:24] it that's just the current ordinance
[25:26] right now without any changes this is
[25:28] just for your you know focusing on what
[25:31] you all you know that's what it is right
[25:33] now so if you want to change it um
[25:37] nothing's been changed that's how it
[25:39] exists right now and then if I may uh
[25:41] definitely I think the the place that
[25:42] we're in right now with the um passing
[25:45] out of committee for Mr Fowler and Mr
[25:47] Butler and then also the uh continued
[25:50] review of The League of women's voters I
[25:51] think we're now working to actively get
[25:53] the members there's still an emphasis on
[25:55] passing this amendment to the code um so
[25:58] so I don't know if people would feel
[25:59] more comfortable having a moment to read
[26:00] it uh outside of the committee meeting
[26:03] but essentially the changes I just said
[26:04] is what the chair from the cprb is
[26:07] recommending Mr P I'd be in support of
[26:10] moving forward with this resolution as
[26:12] presented by the cprb um so I don't know
[26:17] how the rest of the council feels but
[26:18] any
[26:20] question my brief review of it it almost
[26:22] seemed like that's um not so much of a
[26:25] significant change it almost seem like
[26:27] the language this could could interpret
[26:30] to where we're trying to go so I almost
[26:31] feel that you know so I could be exp
[26:34] as and then truly it is a minor
[26:37] Amendment uh and the emphasis was put on
[26:40] allowing the board to receive their full
[26:43] body and then to be able to make those
[26:45] recommendations at a grander scale with
[26:47] a a full full
[26:49] board Mr Williams are you looking to
[26:52] like f that from the general public then
[26:54] if the organization fails to uh fails to
[26:57] uh put forward nominee then you're then
[27:01] the mayor could pick somebody from the
[27:02] general public and then the council
[27:04] could vote on that appointment but it
[27:05] would be a general
[27:07] public uh appointment and it's not
[27:10] taking away from the the the existing
[27:12] structure of the various other
[27:14] organizations it's says for that
[27:16] appointment for that term period it'll
[27:19] be coming from the general public rather
[27:21] than
[27:22] from from any because that Organization
[27:26] for that cycle has for not for the
[27:29] better term has passed on that
[27:31] particular appointment and then maybe
[27:33] the the mayor can
[27:34] then uh get a general public appointee
[27:38] for that term and then all those other
[27:41] Frameworks as as to the uh membership
[27:44] would stay in place correct would you
[27:47] want to see some language to that effect
[27:49] and I can send that to you all next time
[27:51] Mr M so follow U Mr Brian um does that
[27:55] bar them from submitting an applicant in
[27:58] a 2-year period oh I would say that
[28:02] vacancy would have already been filled
[28:05] so they would have to wait that
[28:07] c of the term is what's proposed so I
[28:11] would say if we were continuing with the
[28:13] inclusion of an alternate that agency
[28:14] would be able to submit an alternate um
[28:17] but that primary seat would have been
[28:19] filled or would be theoretically
[28:21] filled um Mr per um so the the other
[28:25] thing I I think that when the last time
[28:27] we had this discussion you said that the
[28:28] council would also be able to sub you
[28:31] know submit recommendations to the mayor
[28:33] and um and I think we should need to
[28:35] look a little bit deeper into um section
[28:37] 93 because I do believe that there's uh
[28:40] the there's a citiz at large that we're
[28:42] not currently putting there and um in
[28:46] addition to the addition to the mayor in
[28:48] addition to the mayor um I think there's
[28:50] another seat there we'll have I'll have
[28:51] to look more closely at 93 and also the
[28:53] ex official I believe is the public
[28:55] safety commissioner that is not a voting
[28:57] member but would um would be a part of
[29:00] this this
[29:02] board as far as regarding the you saying
[29:06] another position from I believe there is
[29:09] and I don't I thought I thought we had
[29:10] the whole thing but I only have page one
[29:11] so I'll I'll get back to you on that
[29:13] okay so the two ex official members one
[29:16] of which is the uh commissioner as Miss
[29:18] pteri highlighted and the second is the
[29:20] representative from the police
[29:21] department which I believe is uh
[29:24] Lieutenant can't
[29:26] remember captain
[29:31] sorry
[29:32] Captain um but to answer your previous
[29:34] question I don't know if we'd have to
[29:36] write in specific language because the
[29:37] assumption is the mayor would be
[29:39] receiving candidates so that could come
[29:42] from anyone to include a member of the
[29:44] organization that lost the right they
[29:46] would still be able to theoretically
[29:48] submit their name also Mr Mayor Mr
[29:50] chairman and again the intent when the
[29:52] legislation was first put in was to have
[29:56] uh a broad-based participation of that
[29:59] board so it had various groups
[30:02] throughout the community and you know
[30:05] it's run through periods of being very
[30:07] active sometimes it's a little bit less
[30:09] active we're bouncing back now it's the
[30:12] other side would be to
[30:13] review those groups has there been any
[30:17] change in the community since this
[30:19] legislation was put in where another
[30:23] group should be added or be one deleted
[30:26] to
[30:28] uh again ensure a broad base and diverse
[30:32] representation on the board and a active
[30:35] level of
[30:36] participation yep and I completely agree
[30:38] with that I think the uh Embassy put on
[30:41] uh fully Staffing this board so that
[30:44] they themselves would be able to submit
[30:45] those recommendations which includes
[30:47] various other aspects of the code uh but
[30:49] I have stressed to them the
[30:51] understanding of maybe expanding or the
[30:53] uh inclusion of other uh memberships as
[30:55] well
[30:58] if there weren't any other questions or
[30:59] concerns um are we comfortable to make a
[31:02] motion so are we moving forward with the
[31:04] U recommendation from the president of
[31:07] the board yep so be proceeding with the
[31:09] recommendation with regards to adding
[31:11] the 30-day uh stipulation and then is
[31:14] everyone in agreement with also
[31:15] including specific language equ
[31:17] addressing to the inclusion of an
[31:19] alternate let me oh M sorry the process
[31:23] would call for calling for a public
[31:24] hearing so if you call for a public
[31:26] hearing get the draft legislation or if
[31:30] anybody has any suggestions or
[31:31] modifications to it it would still be
[31:34] two weeks
[31:35] to modify in some manner or REM make it
[31:39] some comment at the public hearing that
[31:41] may shift your thinking one way or the
[31:43] other that's fair right so motion to
[31:46] call the public hearing yeah so moove
[31:47] that motion to call public hearing
[31:49] second all those in
[31:51] favor are there any other items to Beall
[31:54] the Public Safety Committee hearing none
[31:55] you have motion to adourn so move second
[31:59] faor thank you call to order finance
[32:02] committee and the fourth item is
[32:03] amendment to budget line car is
[32:11] not good evening pretty simple one for
[32:15] you tonight uh which requesting a line
[32:17] item uh for zoning officer we're going
[32:20] to move it back uh from the code
[32:21] enforcement to development also excuse
[32:24] me from the code enforcement office to
[32:26] the development office
[32:28] um it's an easy switch um originally it
[32:31] was in development and was moved down to
[32:34] the code enforcement office so we're
[32:35] just switching it
[32:37] back this just reflects actual Staffing
[32:41] and is revenue neutral just moving from
[32:44] one position to the other one location
[32:46] to the other where it belongs to yeah
[32:48] any other questions comment see on have
[32:50] of motion so move second all in favor I
[32:54] thank the next item is called for public
[32:56] hearing think special assessment
[32:58] District on a portion of n College
[33:00] Street this was an oversight and we're
[33:03] trying to put this in
[33:06] place any questions I'll move it second
[33:10] all in favor I I the next item is just a
[33:13] reminder of Central Parkway sidewalk
[33:16] Improvement program the public hearing
[33:18] is scheduled for next Monday February
[33:21] 26th at 700 p.m. room
[33:24] 29 the next item is BC CJs Discovery
[33:29] grant money Mr Mayor thank you Mr
[33:32] chairman this is money that the uh when
[33:35] the rules were changed and Discovery uh
[33:40] done back 3 years ago now uh the state
[33:43] provides money to the counties to offset
[33:46] the increased
[33:48] cost we uh get some of that money uh
[33:52] from the county to offset our cost
[33:55] within the police department terms of
[33:57] put put together Discovery and uh while
[34:00] I appreciate this money but ask the
[34:02] council to approve it I'm not sure it
[34:04] actually covers our real cost in it but
[34:07] uh to ask we uh appreciate any help we
[34:10] can
[34:12] get this just covered asly not the
[34:15] benefit so we'll have to pick up the and
[34:17] some the actual time that's spent too
[34:19] some of this can be fairly
[34:23] demanded go ahead please I have a
[34:25] question I hope it's not putting cheap
[34:27] on the spot but could you just tell us
[34:28] more about what this discovery plan
[34:32] is no yes for the
[34:37] employes you talk about the grant or the
[34:39] actual process in the workload yeah kind
[34:42] of like just I I mean the Grant's fine
[34:44] but I we'd like to know kind of I would
[34:45] like to know kind of what it
[34:47] covers will you join us join
[34:51] us
[34:55] oops thank you thank you so uh this
[34:58] would cover partial salaries for Two
[35:00] employees that we currently have um an
[35:03] ips3 and a clerical Aid that work mainly
[35:06] uh preparing stuff for the DA's office
[35:09] so they uh review body warn camera
[35:11] footage they provide that and they help
[35:14] get records ready to uh for prosecution
[35:18] purposes so there's just a city
[35:20] employees they are currently C employees
[35:22] now yes they're currently CES okay
[35:26] that's was my question any other
[35:28] questions thank you seeing now we have a
[35:32] motion all in
[35:34] favor the next item is the bis s
[35:37] property lease agreement Miss bfield
[35:40] thank you um I brought this up for
[35:42] discussion actually started during the
[35:43] budget season and 23 bringing it back
[35:46] again um to um we pass the resolution
[35:50] 2015 that's while W ago this was and um
[35:53] we raised the rent at that time from $50
[35:56] to $500 so I am with asking that we once
[36:00] again um look at increasing the rent it
[36:02] is a source of revenue for the city we
[36:05] um we're going to be having Revenue
[36:08] surefall according to the mayor in terms
[36:10] in 2025 so the council agreed
[36:13] collectively that we would be looking at
[36:14] Revenue throughout um two of the major
[36:18] points that we um did were looking at
[36:20] during the budget discussion or having
[36:21] concerns about were waste and um and
[36:26] sewer and water so just wanted to have
[36:28] this discussion to bring forth um to
[36:31] once again have this discussion to bring
[36:32] forth about um increasing the rent there
[36:35] has we have had an increase in and I can
[36:37] provide you the information there has
[36:39] been an increase in taxes that were
[36:40] paying to the town nkuna for this uh
[36:43] particular property so and considering
[36:46] you know all the things that we're
[36:47] showing increase that we would also
[36:49] consider increasing this to it will um
[36:51] not necessarily um cover everything but
[36:55] to at least um be be offset offset this
[36:59] cost so I'm putting before the council
[37:01] that we um increase the rent there were
[37:03] some conversations about how much
[37:06] willing to definitely have that
[37:07] discussion I know there was an amount
[37:08] that was that you didn't mean that that
[37:12] uh um but that you know we should we
[37:16] should take a look at increasing it as I
[37:18] said it was 50 went to 500 and it's been
[37:20] 9 years the city has um had increased
[37:24] cost in order for for this property and
[37:27] so I would like to see us to um to
[37:30] increase that
[37:31] rent so yes Patrick I'd like to stand by
[37:36] what I said at the last meeting which is
[37:37] that I think that I'd like to know more
[37:40] about what the original terms of the job
[37:43] offer what were that in other words if
[37:45] this person was hired with the
[37:47] understanding that they would be um
[37:49] residing in this house providing um
[37:52] services at that property um that I just
[37:56] feel that
[37:58] you know it's sort of going against the
[37:59] original terms of the job agreement if
[38:03] there was a letter of agreement or a
[38:04] contract or whatever um so I just want
[38:07] to put that out there again
[38:09] um for
[38:11] consideration
[38:13] so we just have to find out if there is
[38:15] an L of agreements or if there is any I
[38:18] just feel that LE agreement I we asked
[38:22] for that yes there was a lease agreement
[38:24] and it was last done in 27
[38:27] 26 and and and and the the particulars
[38:31] of that is is very verifying
[38:33] calibrations of water level I'm just
[38:35] getting examples here inspect monthly
[38:38] inspect all Vents and vent screens to
[38:40] ensure their integrity every six months
[38:43] operate all valves from the fully opened
[38:45] or closed positions to the opposite
[38:47] position as appropriate and visually
[38:49] inspect also uh at least on a monthly
[38:52] basis visually inspect the property to
[38:54] do a w around so
[38:57] what perhaps for you you have to find a
[39:00] benchmark and what how a you what's the
[39:02] rent you know perhaps the city assessors
[39:05] help you with that or perhaps the a real
[39:08] estate agent who's familiar with single
[39:10] family residents rentals then you have a
[39:13] benchmark and after that having that
[39:15] Benchmark then you can quantify as best
[39:18] as you can the work that's done at and
[39:22] and fact that into your into your your
[39:24] rental agreement having physical
[39:26] presence there at the at the at the
[39:28] reservoir so I think maybe get the get
[39:33] the City Assessor if if they're
[39:34] comfortable with doing that just looking
[39:36] at the house not the of their property
[39:38] just a rental you know you know how many
[39:40] bathrooms you know how many bedrooms Etc
[39:43] or a real estate agent assessor who's
[39:46] familiar with rental properties to go in
[39:49] take a look this is what a house like
[39:52] this would go for notwithstanding the
[39:54] property and then you have a benchmark
[39:56] and then and that Benchmark I then you
[39:59] can you know Quant you know work that
[40:02] those other intangibles down as far as
[40:05] having a person on site what's the value
[40:08] of that right and then having the
[40:10] physical work that has to be done on a
[40:12] daily basis or that still need to be
[40:15] done and then we can factor out a new
[40:17] lease agreement that I would recommend
[40:19] be redone and reissued on a yearly basis
[40:24] so this way on a yearly basis the
[40:26] council always knows what's going on and
[40:29] then you're not looking at a larger
[40:31] increase this way you're keeping tabs on
[40:34] it rather than trying to play going back
[40:36] in time so that's my
[40:39] recommendation Mr can you can you share
[40:42] with C
[40:45] the to all of us I would appreciate it
[40:48] thanks please and I'm going to share the
[40:50] information about the tax you know I
[40:52] think you should get this one so I'll
[40:54] provide that I'll provide the lease
[40:56] agreements to this have an idea of how
[40:58] much you know what sort of work has to
[41:00] be done but I just think that maybe the
[41:02] next time we're here you have a figure
[41:05] based off of that figure have this and
[41:08] then you all come up
[41:11] with an agreement your with okay thank
[41:15] you and I did pass out the the taxes
[41:17] that we paid over the years um since
[41:20] 2015 actually so I just want to make
[41:22] sure that you have all the information
[41:23] as making these decisions that all the
[41:26] information is there
[41:28] I I'm sorry sure so and to miss
[41:30] Patrick's um Point there's no um it
[41:33] wasn't a term of employment because the
[41:35] lease that Mr um O'Brien is speaking
[41:38] about was signed with the previous
[41:40] tenant so it wasn't because of their job
[41:44] so the previous tenant the agreement was
[41:46] signed so it B it seems like an employee
[41:49] whomever lived there it was by the it
[41:52] was by the tennessy not the
[41:54] job I guess
[41:57] I guess I'm wondering if there was some
[41:59] sort of um letter of agreement upon
[42:02] offering the job to the person who's in
[42:05] the position currently if that letter of
[42:07] agreement said that part of the terms of
[42:10] the employment like any of us that would
[42:12] get a salary letter you know uh from an
[42:16] employer would would indicate that part
[42:19] of the terms of that employment were was
[42:21] the ability to live in this house um for
[42:24] this particular uh we're going on is
[42:27] what is in the lease agreement as far as
[42:30] that that's what we have as far as
[42:32] usually a water department employee
[42:34] because of the fact if it's a water
[42:36] department property and the person needs
[42:38] to have some sort of familiarization
[42:39] with that type of type of so so it's not
[42:44] employee benefit necessarily but so
[42:46] there was nothing in a in a letter of
[42:48] agreement upon higher I guess is what
[42:50] I'm asking I think I'm aware so I um I
[42:52] want to say like I I agree strongly with
[42:55] us being able to kind of wrap around and
[42:57] kind of quantify what is happening at
[42:59] the property and and really assign a
[43:01] real value to that before moving forward
[43:03] but I also I would just kind of caution
[43:05] us if we step outside to get like a kind
[43:08] of a more real estate agent cuz I don't
[43:09] think that I think any real estate agent
[43:12] is operating kind of in the free market
[43:14] this isn't necessarily a free market
[43:16] situation if it's not um a city employee
[43:20] that's uh filling a certain situation
[43:22] it's not like U we would be looking to
[43:24] rent better property to anyone else so I
[43:26] just think that maybe the assessor would
[43:27] be I just my best thought around would
[43:31] be the person to do that I just threw
[43:33] those out
[43:36] yeah oh not goad please oh thank you yes
[43:40] and and some of the emails that have
[43:42] gone back and forth between myself and
[43:43] you and forward and on to the council um
[43:46] I did suggest I mean that that you know
[43:48] first of all if we were going to assess
[43:52] as a
[43:53] council the cost of uh that we'd like to
[43:56] uh raise this rent I would personally
[43:58] like a tour if if it's going to be up to
[44:02] us I'd like a tour of this property um
[44:05] just because I'd like to see it and and
[44:08] know what why I'm raising the rent or
[44:10] not raising the rent um secondly I did
[44:12] suggest if we're not qualified like uh
[44:15] Council O'Brien put through that um you
[44:19] know uh should we um have a real estate
[44:22] agent or someone who specializes in
[44:24] rental property before we even do that
[44:28] um uh the department of development has
[44:30] come up in in these uh emails so I'm not
[44:33] sure um you know would they be the ones
[44:36] deciding some type of rental increase I
[44:39] mean um also what's come up is um Naga
[44:43] Mohawk the the electric U Bill National
[44:47] Grid um so um yes the city pays that
[44:52] bill but then we get a credit back from
[44:54] them every year because of the solar
[44:57] solar uh panels up there
[45:00] um again we we we really don't want to
[45:03] keep this personal um we want to keep it
[45:06] about the property um but yet you know
[45:09] there's been statements made um that the
[45:12] employee that lives there can more than
[45:14] enough afford this property and you know
[45:17] it's been put out there how much this
[45:19] individual makes um and again we want to
[45:23] keep it more businesslike than than
[45:27] personal so I just like to bring to
[45:29] bring uh those things up and as far as
[45:32] um you know there's been an amount of
[45:34] $1,000 put out there from $500 to
[45:37] $11,000 not that I don't think $11,000
[45:39] is absurd um it's not absurd in today's
[45:44] rent but
[45:45] 100% increase on the $500 $1,000 I think
[45:50] is absurd and any one of us that would
[45:53] uh take a phone call from any individual
[45:56] in the city whose landlord wanted to
[45:58] raise their rent 100% um we'd be
[46:02] fighting for for them so again we have
[46:04] to think of us as the city and revenue
[46:07] coming in but we also have to think of
[46:10] what we would do for a lot of residents
[46:12] in the city
[46:14] so it's not makes me pretty go ahead
[46:16] please oh sorry so I say it's
[46:19] questioning your inclusion of some of
[46:20] the language because i' say up until
[46:22] that point right now you will be the
[46:23] first person that brought that up at
[46:25] this meeting um so that was my my first
[46:27] question okay um the the second response
[46:30] to your comment of $1,000 I would say
[46:32] that clarification would have
[46:35] credibility if that market print was
[46:37] significantly under the threshold so I
[46:40] would say from the residents that I've
[46:42] interacted with it is very difficult to
[46:44] get an $1,000 studio so I would say
[46:47] based on my experience which is not that
[46:50] of which of the City Assessor so I want
[46:51] to thank Mr O'Brien for adding his uh
[46:54] input and feedback um I would say to
[46:56] myself I I don't know what value seeing
[46:58] a property would have for me um my
[47:00] understanding of including that
[47:02] individual from the ass's office is they
[47:04] would be best suited with their
[47:06] background and professional uh
[47:07] wherewithal to recommend a price range
[47:10] to us and then although I am partially
[47:14] not in agreement with kind of evaluating
[47:16] some of the additional work that's done
[47:18] on the property due to the fact that if
[47:19] it's truly city-owned we have
[47:21] departments and Staffing to do that work
[47:23] so I think we're then looking at
[47:24] duplication of resources and then we're
[47:27] evaluating how to continue maintaining
[47:29] this property I believe the mayor was
[47:31] highlighting that there may be some
[47:32] abilities to incorporate some
[47:33] technological assist so I think as we
[47:35] look at properly reviewing uh the the
[47:39] functionality of this property which I
[47:41] understand there are certain duties and
[47:42] aspects that are needed uh I agree with
[47:44] that um but I think in the year 2024 I
[47:47] think we might be able to automate some
[47:48] of those outside of if you need a person
[47:50] to walk the property like that's
[47:51] understood um so I think there are some
[47:53] ways to kind of appreciate the services
[47:55] that have been rendered thus far but
[47:57] evaluate if there's a way to apply some
[47:58] of that smart City uh norance that we we
[48:02] highlight and and the and a means to
[48:04] kind of do some inventional savings as
[48:07] well go ahead please so I did speak to
[48:10] Mr O'Brien regarding your um suggestion
[48:14] that the council walk through and you
[48:16] can articulate what you I think as as Mr
[48:19] Williams says I think the value of this
[48:21] you're going in there for you know
[48:23] evaluation and and the individual is a
[48:25] tenant of of the that's his house I just
[48:30] think I think it would be best for for
[48:33] the assessor to take a look at the type
[48:35] of property assess it from
[48:38] just an arms length transaction if you
[48:40] will how many how how many rooms are in
[48:42] there how many bathrooms Etc and give
[48:44] you a value rather than going through
[48:46] because um I don't know what I mean it's
[48:50] certainly city property you you could do
[48:52] it but I don't know what value that you
[48:54] know this is not like going through the
[48:56] you're going through somebody's home as
[48:58] as if you will as the
[49:01] landlord go ahead please yeah I just put
[49:04] that out there as the request of the
[49:06] tenant uh would like us to personally
[49:08] see um and I'd like to know if any of my
[49:10] other council members would like to view
[49:12] the property as
[49:14] well well I mean as I said I I've given
[49:17] my recommendation to the than I
[49:19] appreciate
[49:21] it so I've seen it from the outside and
[49:24] so I don't I don't necessarily feel like
[49:25] I need to to uh go inside someone's home
[49:29] and and again you know uh I personally
[49:31] don't have that and doesn't S within my
[49:35] Pur to be able to look and say well this
[49:36] is value that that it just is the only
[49:39] thing I'd be able to look at is the
[49:40] paint on the walls or how it's kept and
[49:42] I I don't think there's necessarily
[49:44] value in that uh so I have to agree
[49:47] that's why I raised the point to Mr
[49:49] O'Brien when he was brought up that what
[49:51] is the best way and so he's he's he's
[49:53] clearly articulated that
[49:56] so I think we just um we should maybe
[49:59] stick to Mr O'Brien our recommendation
[50:02] to have the assessor office look into
[50:04] this or an outside agency look into it
[50:06] and bring that information to us as as a
[50:08] council here rather than us going there
[50:10] individually or collectively and try to
[50:12] make a determination and then come back
[50:13] and vote on the same recommendation way
[50:16] way so I think the recommendation from
[50:18] this is the right path to for us to
[50:21] choose and let's um do that and get the
[50:24] information back to us and we regard to
[50:27] raising something 100% in this year
[50:29] budget we raise commercial wat to on
[50:32] garbage 100% so we do we do we did raise
[50:35] 100% on some
[50:41] fees yeah again I just think it's really
[50:43] important that we understand and are
[50:45] able to put a number to you know what's
[50:47] happening um Know What's happen
[50:50] operationally on the property now um I
[50:53] think that's something that we obviously
[50:54] need to go into kind of whatever formula
[50:57] we're using to to figure out what we
[50:59] should be receiving um I mean I don't
[51:01] need to see the uh property personally
[51:05] you know sure it's no mini Mansion up
[51:08] there but I just think that we just at
[51:09] least want to let the people who are
[51:11] most qualified to do so do that and then
[51:13] we can factor in um um what services are
[51:17] are being provided um at that the given
[51:19] moment
[51:20] so go ahead please and just to clarify
[51:23] my my point like I have zero interest I
[51:26] trust that our city assessors are are
[51:28] best equipped to render us a threshold
[51:31] and then we'll evaluate that accordingly
[51:34] um and also I just want to kind of take
[51:35] a point um my position is not taken into
[51:38] consideration the person uh I think
[51:40] during our budget season or budget
[51:41] discussions which were very lengthy
[51:43] we've left that with an understanding of
[51:45] evaluating other Revenue Lines within
[51:47] the city so I think looking at this
[51:49] individually yes it might be a minor uh
[51:53] return of funds back to the the city
[51:55] should we choose to in in the rents but
[51:57] I think collectively and that's the
[51:58] conversation I'm truly looking for I
[52:00] think there needs to be more of an
[52:01] emphasis placed on capturing uh some of
[52:04] those additional Revenue lines to to
[52:06] deat into uh that uh gu I won look at
[52:09] itga just look at the the gap of before
[52:12] next year's budget to include having our
[52:13] quarterly reviews so this just happens
[52:15] to be the first item that we're
[52:17] discussing but and it it will not be the
[52:20] last go ahead please so in that you know
[52:23] we we talked about revenue and talked
[52:24] about revenue and so I I am going to
[52:26] just tell you that I took an opportunity
[52:27] to look at the revenue lines and for the
[52:29] F past um at least 3 years we have not
[52:32] been get any full revenue on that line
[52:35] so just want to you know we we talked
[52:37] about it so it was brought up by um
[52:40] various people so just want to make sure
[52:42] that you know we need to we need to
[52:44] rectify
[52:50] that and I don't know if that's because
[52:51] there's some agreement with the city I
[52:53] don't know the details of that but
[52:55] that's
[52:59] adjusted he said that's been adjusted
[53:01] says that was
[53:02] adjusted
[53:04] okay any other question go ahead please
[53:06] no I just want to again want to clarify
[53:08] that we you know need to keep the you
[53:10] know the focus as to like this being a a
[53:13] city property and not about a person or
[53:16] a Personnel issue or anything of that
[53:18] matter I think if we go down that road
[53:20] then we do need to um enter into an an
[53:23] executive session um I think that if it
[53:25] was um we're making our decisions based
[53:28] on anything personal or anything that we
[53:30] think is you know outside of from of our
[53:34] scope then I just would caution us not
[53:36] to do that um and I definitely will be
[53:38] participating in
[53:40] that I think the discussion so far has
[53:42] been about Revenue income and all of
[53:45] that so and and we're we're clear about
[53:47] using the term
[53:49] tenant I think J what go ahead sorry in
[53:53] independent of this discussion
[53:54] appreciate the council's interest
[53:57] if you have not been to that site you
[54:00] should be to the site it first of all
[54:03] it's also part of our critical
[54:05] infrastructure so in terms of Homeland
[54:07] Security it's rated differently there's
[54:09] a 711 megawatt solar facility that's
[54:13] been installed there it's also an
[54:15] integral part town hisun is water system
[54:18] and some of the communications equipment
[54:20] for Public Safety uh not only for the
[54:23] city but throughout the county is
[54:25] located there so that some point should
[54:29] go there just be aware of it and
[54:32] understand the significance of
[54:34] it go ahead so does NIS I know it's in
[54:37] nisun so does NIS unit take any part of
[54:39] the like the outdoor maintenance are
[54:41] they responsible for any of
[54:44] that no
[54:46] and we're challenging the assessment on
[54:49] some of our property and our we always
[54:52] look forward to working with our sister
[54:55] communities sometimes I'm not sure we're
[54:57] getting the best deal and some of them
[54:59] were're moving through formal
[55:01] proceedings on well in the first year it
[55:03] was like
[55:04] $8600 increase um I think back in 15 or
[55:09] 16 and then it's been less since then
[55:11] but we're looking at um over the those
[55:14] past 9 years $15,000 increase so for me
[55:17] it's about you know we're looking at the
[55:19] increases that we're getting and we need
[55:20] to um Step Up the the revenue on that
[55:23] and also Tak into consideration what the
[55:26] Market rent is now which is um pretty
[55:29] significant probably sometimes three
[55:31] times that or even four for for I don't
[55:34] know what the inside looks like but for
[55:36] um for an apartment and not a house so
[55:39] again this is the really about revenue
[55:40] and um costs that the city is incurring
[55:43] and how we can like increase our Revenue
[55:45] to close that very large budget Gap that
[55:48] uh has been you know that the mayor's
[55:50] brought forward that we're going to have
[55:52] and I think that's why it's important
[55:53] that we do this starting now and not
[55:55] wait until we you know we're sitting
[55:57] around the table again in October um
[56:00] because that was so much fun that look
[56:03] forward to it
[56:05] again so that's why I want to bring this
[56:07] forward and to make that consideration
[56:08] so U Mr O'Brien would you um be asking
[56:12] the assessor to do that or how yeah our
[56:14] office will ask the assessor to do that
[56:15] and then uh and then come back with it
[56:19] for your next next council meeting with
[56:21] a figure from which to work from and
[56:23] then from there proceed okay draft the
[56:26] lease at the appropriate
[56:28] time and the current lease that you have
[56:30] you're going to email it to yes the leas
[56:33] the last lease that was yes for your for
[56:36] your situational awareness yes we'll
[56:37] send that to you but just to be clear
[56:41] the lease that we're going to get is for
[56:43] a prior T is there we don't have a
[56:45] current Le that's correct is that
[56:47] correct that is correct okay thank you
[56:50] just sing in so we have a look at the
[56:51] language just for the language the
[56:53] duties and responsibilities would be
[56:55] good for
[56:57] reference for free okay thank you thank
[57:00] you Mr mudar any other questions so we
[57:04] build P this for two
[57:08] weeks okay any other item before
[57:11] Finance motion to return so mov second
[57:14] all in favor I thank you okay I'd like
[57:17] to call the order government operations
[57:19] we have two items on the agenda the
[57:21] first is the home rule request to
[57:23] support Senate and assembly bills a70 58
[57:27] s 7409 to increase the membership of the
[57:30] special district operations and
[57:32] development committee uh president 43r
[57:35] thank you so the um the board from the
[57:39] uh dsad U brought this forward to us and
[57:42] asked that well they actually went first
[57:45] to assembly in Santa Barbara and and the
[57:48] senator and uh to ask that they be able
[57:51] to increase their board and they so they
[57:53] bypass the process of asking for the
[57:55] home rule so they went there and they
[57:57] already got their bill numbers but the
[57:59] Legislative Office uh informed them that
[58:01] in order to do this they need to come
[58:03] back to the council and ask for the home
[58:05] rule so um they reached out to us to um
[58:09] see if we would do that if we're in
[58:10] agreement with them increasing their
[58:12] board and what uh I was told is the same
[58:15] thing that many boards have said they're
[58:17] having difficulty achieving their Quorum
[58:20] so they want to be able to increase
[58:22] their board in order to be able to make
[58:24] a quum and to move forward with their
[58:25] meetings so I'm bringing this for for
[58:27] the council to um support a home rule
[58:30] request to the Senate and the assembly
[58:33] for the bills that there to increase the
[58:35] membership um of the
[58:37] DSA questions
[58:42] comments move pres support second second
[58:47] all those in favor
[58:49] I all right our next agenda item is
[58:52] appointment to the ethics board and
[58:54] that's all presid
[58:56] yeah so this came before the um the
[58:59] council once before it got
[59:01] to it moved forward on the agenda out of
[59:04] the committee onto the agenda and um
[59:07] there was a roll call requested at the
[59:09] committee meeting excuse me at the
[59:11] council meeting and so since there was
[59:13] no second the the item failed because it
[59:15] had been removed from the consent agenda
[59:17] so um I'm bringing it back again and I
[59:21] just want to again articulate that's
[59:23] another board that has it's made up of
[59:25] five
[59:26] and right now only three of the it's
[59:29] excuse me it's supposed to be five but
[59:31] right now there's only four people and
[59:32] only three of the four can um are able
[59:35] to make the meetings because of health
[59:37] issues and so what that means basically
[59:40] is anything that comes before them every
[59:42] single person has to agree because two
[59:45] to one will not pass anything because
[59:47] the board is supposed to be five so um I
[59:50] know that one person that's on the board
[59:52] is going to probably out in my is for a
[59:55] while so I was bringing forth the name
[59:58] of Christopher Marney who as we all know
[1:00:00] who used was formerly an employee here
[1:00:03] and his resume is before you and for us
[1:00:06] to um consider this individual to um to
[1:00:10] be moved forward to be a member of the
[1:00:12] ethics board any questions or
[1:00:18] concerns uh so I wanted to take a moment
[1:00:20] these were comments that I withheld from
[1:00:21] our last council meeting but I take a
[1:00:23] pleasure in the opportunity to like
[1:00:25] address Mr who in the room right now uh
[1:00:27] over the course of my political career
[1:00:29] in the the city uh I have only known for
[1:00:33] Mr Mar to have served in his capacity as
[1:00:35] Deputy Corporation Council with the
[1:00:37] utmost distinction and professionalism
[1:00:39] and I think that is none short than what
[1:00:40] we would expect from anyone functioning
[1:00:42] in that role uh to date I haven't heard
[1:00:44] of any issues or complaints regarding
[1:00:46] the manner in which she practiced being
[1:00:48] a steward of our city code uh but to me
[1:00:51] he uh personally would would provide
[1:00:54] unbiased feedback on how to to uh
[1:00:56] conduct um my uh uh actions as a city
[1:00:59] council member and it is with that
[1:01:01] understanding and those interactions
[1:01:03] that I believe he would be best suited
[1:01:04] to apply an unbiased and objective uh
[1:01:07] presence onto this board uh so I would
[1:01:09] ask that if anyone had any uh uh
[1:01:13] concerns with the individual that you
[1:01:14] would just make them known at this point
[1:01:16] uh just due to his uh resume and uh his
[1:01:20] as Community involvement also I I don't
[1:01:22] know why uh anyone would be opposed to
[1:01:24] having a credible individual Jo join uh
[1:01:26] this board to help
[1:01:30] support questions anyone want to add on
[1:01:33] to that express any concerns
[1:01:36] questions see I move this do do we have
[1:01:39] to move this or it's
[1:01:40] already no we don't have to it says well
[1:01:44] do we have we do have to move it yes we
[1:01:45] should move because it fell off the
[1:01:47] agenda so we're going have to move
[1:01:50] again move I move I'll second those in
[1:01:53] favor I I thank you thank you no more
[1:01:56] business to operations I will AC a
[1:01:58] motion to adjourn so move second those
[1:02:01] in favor we adjourn thank you I'd like
[1:02:04] to reconvene City development and
[1:02:05] planning um we had originally had 11
[1:02:08] items on the agenda Miss Carver needed
[1:02:10] to go on to her training and so
[1:02:11] therefore she's left so we have 10 items
[1:02:14] remaining
[1:02:17] um and the first one is to I don't see
[1:02:20] Mr wall in the room
[1:02:21] though uh are
[1:02:24] youing you you're Mr well I on those
[1:02:28] issues yes I should be able to handle
[1:02:30] any question the council so the item
[1:02:32] number two is the authoriz the issue
[1:02:34] issue of a revocable permit number 681
[1:02:37] to pierce Renewables for a sign that
[1:02:39] overhang the cities right away 155 I I
[1:02:43] think the council has the information on
[1:02:45] this called a fairly standard
[1:02:47] application for signage in city where it
[1:02:51] goes into the city right away and uh
[1:02:54] asking for revokable perit to be
[1:02:58] issued any questions oh your hands not
[1:03:01] up that's just like put your hand on
[1:03:02] your face second all in favor I thank
[1:03:06] you item number three is another vocable
[1:03:09] permit to 680 uh Number 682 Miler
[1:03:12] restaurant for assignment overhang
[1:03:14] cities right away at 500
[1:03:17] Street steel Bank of America
[1:03:21] building but I thought those were
[1:03:24] Apartments
[1:03:25] this is on the first
[1:03:27] floor where this sign is going to go the
[1:03:30] business is going the apartments are
[1:03:33] stairs Citi oh this is this is not no
[1:03:37] 500 is Bank of America so the other side
[1:03:40] of the street the new Ortho no isn't it
[1:03:44] right oh Ortho New York's going to have
[1:03:47] a restaurant on the ground floor
[1:03:49] yep okay I guess it'll be easy you can't
[1:03:52] be late for lunch come back from lunch
[1:03:56] not the restaurant that's going to where
[1:03:57] the old citizens B was okay all
[1:04:02] right in the package you can see the
[1:04:05] signage close to the corner but the
[1:04:08] property line for all practical purposes
[1:04:10] is right at
[1:04:13] the okay
[1:04:16] sidewalk that's interesting a motion
[1:04:20] second all in
[1:04:23] favor okay um
[1:04:26] next item number four is uh work on
[1:04:31] the contractor's building the pump
[1:04:34] station and the golf course and this is
[1:04:40] the electrical work and upgrades there
[1:04:43] and it's in budget
[1:04:48] and I want to say this is going to
[1:04:50] finish the building off but I'm not sure
[1:04:52] if there might still be some other work
[1:04:55] on it
[1:04:56] so this is within the ARA allocation
[1:04:58] that we've already provided to this uh
[1:04:59] to the Dolf
[1:05:03] [Music]
[1:05:04] course I'm
[1:05:09] going now if this is out of
[1:05:16] the oh yes this is for the irrigation
[1:05:19] pump house so this is upgrade the
[1:05:22] electricity so yes you're right so it's
[1:05:24] already cover there is something other
[1:05:26] work that's coming out of the golf
[1:05:28] course budget but this electrical
[1:05:30] contract will upgrade
[1:05:32] the outline three-phase wiring to be
[1:05:35] able to handle the new equipment for the
[1:05:37] pumps okay any question I'll move it
[1:05:41] second all in favor thank you uh the
[1:05:45] next item is to review the moratorium on
[1:05:47] smoke and vape shops M Boro yes thank
[1:05:50] you um so um everyone received from uh
[1:05:54] Corporation Council harash did I say
[1:05:56] that correctly harash yes um the
[1:05:59] moratorium that she uh proposed and put
[1:06:02] forward um had uh several opportunities
[1:06:07] to read it over and um just kind of a
[1:06:11] few questions my myself as far as uh the
[1:06:14] implementation of zoning and we are
[1:06:16] working on that continuously that will
[1:06:19] be once yes we've got to think yes that
[1:06:23] will be a priority because with your
[1:06:25] asking for in this particular
[1:06:27] legislation is is a 90day uh period for
[1:06:31] us to get that zoning ordinance uh
[1:06:35] amended and means it's going into the
[1:06:37] various sections of the zoning code and
[1:06:39] putting in the the definitions and the
[1:06:42] language that you need in that code so
[1:06:44] yeah that's uh this is just the
[1:06:48] moratorium so of putting holding things
[1:06:51] in place for the period of time and then
[1:06:54] the follow on piece of ation which will
[1:06:56] come before you at a later date will be
[1:06:58] the the actual zoning code amendments so
[1:07:03] that will require a public hearing as
[1:07:05] well because we're amending the zoning
[1:07:07] code and uh
[1:07:09] and so that's that will be being worked
[1:07:13] on to get that what you're intending to
[1:07:17] get into the the zoning code this is
[1:07:18] just the moratorium so you can see just
[1:07:21] by the language of this moratorium it
[1:07:23] goes for a number of pages so yes yes
[1:07:25] right so the code has to be
[1:07:29] addressed I so in your estimation is 90
[1:07:32] days enough or should we go back to the
[1:07:34] original six month report back to you in
[1:07:37] 60
[1:07:38] days I will give myself a a 60-day
[1:07:43] deadline and then if I feel that I can't
[1:07:45] get this to you in that time period I
[1:07:47] will report back to you but uh um that
[1:07:51] is my my my goal is to get get it to in
[1:07:55] that time period and I'm not you so but
[1:07:59] 30 days out I'll report back to you okay
[1:08:03] so there was some framework that was
[1:08:04] already set so are you able to like
[1:08:06] build upon that because most of us met
[1:08:10] um with the formal Corporation I know
[1:08:12] that you there's an overlay map that was
[1:08:14] produced now we have to put the overlay
[1:08:17] map and your intents into into the code
[1:08:21] itself so I I've seen the overlay Maps
[1:08:24] but it's we even add into the various
[1:08:27] sections of the code okay and my further
[1:08:30] question is so this uh moratorium is
[1:08:33] also on any
[1:08:36] cannabis uh properties uh businesses
[1:08:38] that want to
[1:08:40] open it's all it's all all that that was
[1:08:43] what your public hearing was when you
[1:08:45] had the public hearing this this this is
[1:08:48] the this is the resolution that you all
[1:08:50] have had back in uh August you had a
[1:08:53] public hearing back in August um um for
[1:08:56] the the implementation for the uh for
[1:09:00] the moratorium legislation and then you
[1:09:02] paused implementing the moratorium
[1:09:07] legislation yes Mr
[1:09:10] bar yeah so so
[1:09:14] um how I understood that the moratorium
[1:09:16] was for vape and smoke shots and um I
[1:09:19] didn't know that our original moratorium
[1:09:21] didn't did not include Cannabis shops to
[1:09:24] my to my Reg think we have an
[1:09:27] ability and I know that Mr O'Brien is
[1:09:29] definitely kind of I appreciate the work
[1:09:31] that you're doing here trying to piece
[1:09:32] this all this together cuz I think that
[1:09:34] that wasn't there was a lot of uh moving
[1:09:36] pieces around this and a lot of
[1:09:38] different discussions so I could see how
[1:09:39] that could um definitely cuz I I know at
[1:09:42] one point that was discussed so I think
[1:09:44] that I can see why I would be here now
[1:09:47] right we're talking UNR one unregulated
[1:09:50] smoke shops vape shops tobacco and vape
[1:09:53] consumption yeah yeah
[1:09:56] yepes not
[1:10:02] canab sorry yeah if if you want to if
[1:10:06] you want that
[1:10:08] amended the Cannabis retail we'll take a
[1:10:10] look at that because I'm looking at the
[1:10:12] original legislation the the original
[1:10:15] first paragraph of the we AB in this it
[1:10:18] says can cannabis retail consumption and
[1:10:21] usess so we can delete that we can
[1:10:25] delete those references for your for for
[1:10:28] final consideration for next Monday to
[1:10:32] delete that we can work that and delete
[1:10:35] those references in this legislation and
[1:10:38] then uh give you a clean a clean
[1:10:41] moratorium if you so way wait Mr Toro
[1:10:44] had hand I'm I'm sorry cannabis
[1:10:46] consumption it's it's not that's just
[1:10:49] using it's not selling it's I'm not
[1:10:52] familiar with that terminology and and
[1:10:55] then I I do have something under um
[1:10:58] number four enactment of temporary
[1:11:02] moratorium uh item number
[1:11:05] two uh no previously submitted
[1:11:09] applications for building permits and
[1:11:11] land so I was under the impression that
[1:11:13] if something had already been submitted
[1:11:15] that that
[1:11:17] was going to go forward that could go
[1:11:21] forward I would like him to stop but
[1:11:23] yeah me too though I was kind of
[1:11:26] well I think okay wait Patrick had her
[1:11:28] hand up first so I'll let go well I
[1:11:30] noticed that as well when I was reading
[1:11:31] this and I actually would be in favor of
[1:11:34] that but I didn't think that we could do
[1:11:35] that either um but I thought that was
[1:11:38] cool that I would like to see that
[1:11:39] included and then I think in terms of
[1:11:41] the Cannabis that it also does include
[1:11:44] the
[1:11:45] paraphernalia in other words like if um
[1:11:48] you know pipes and and that kind of
[1:11:50] thing we could include in this um but it
[1:11:54] was my understand understanding as well
[1:11:55] that we
[1:11:56] couldn't um go against what the state
[1:12:00] was doing with cannabis although this
[1:12:02] does say something I wasn't sure if I
[1:12:05] was reading it correctly um but there
[1:12:08] was something in here that did look
[1:12:13] like well we were able to do that no
[1:12:16] what what it it does in that where
[1:12:18] section of you know relooking at that
[1:12:20] it's just saying we do have the um
[1:12:23] flexibility of smoke shot
[1:12:26] which is you know regarding cannabis
[1:12:28] retail that's what that's saying there
[1:12:31] so we can't do it for the Cannabis
[1:12:32] retail right I that was my original
[1:12:35] understanding was that we couldn't touch
[1:12:36] cannabis retail we can touch cannabis
[1:12:39] paraphernalia right it looks like we're
[1:12:42] only touching cannabis consumption I'm
[1:12:44] sorry it looks like we're only in a
[1:12:46] couple of different spots um and then uh
[1:12:48] on page number four of seven at the very
[1:12:51] top it it touches on cannabis
[1:12:53] consumption again so I I guess what we
[1:12:55] don't want are are people in these smok
[1:12:57] and vape shops kind of like smoking is
[1:13:00] that consumption in
[1:13:02] there we're not allowing that we don't
[1:13:05] want that to
[1:13:06] happen Mr well Mr you have a point no I
[1:13:10] I I think when we we discussed this uh
[1:13:12] previously um the Cannabis um we should
[1:13:15] consider removing the words uh wherever
[1:13:17] it is where with regards to cannabis if
[1:13:20] it's consumption or paraphanalia because
[1:13:23] I don't think we initially talk about
[1:13:24] that I don't think we can touch that
[1:13:26] because of State regulation yeah cuz if
[1:13:28] you take a look at the moratorium
[1:13:30] section it says no new applications for
[1:13:32] vape shops smoke shops toac shops in
[1:13:35] that that's where the moratorium that's
[1:13:37] exactly so we that's where the
[1:13:39] moratorium Lang we need to remove
[1:13:41] anything that um is directing us towards
[1:13:45] cannabis in this um in this draft here
[1:13:48] and at the same time we did talk about
[1:13:50] um the application that is inhouse I
[1:13:53] don't think we can put a stop on that
[1:13:54] legally we have to treat them one by
[1:13:57] Case by case basis and mentioned that
[1:14:00] too the last time we discussed Case by
[1:14:02] case basis to see the application if
[1:14:04] it's worth it and um and if the
[1:14:07] department of development will U will
[1:14:09] move forward with the application on
[1:14:11] filed so we looked uh into that so if
[1:14:14] you were if the council were to pass
[1:14:16] this this would be an ordinance and so
[1:14:18] you would be effectively amending the
[1:14:20] city code so you would uh if you pass
[1:14:24] this or or similar language as a
[1:14:26] moratorium then you you could stop um
[1:14:30] anything you could stop applications
[1:14:32] that are currently on file
[1:14:34] from oh so as of as of the date of
[1:14:38] filing of the date of the ordinance the
[1:14:40] eff dat so they want to file We Can't
[1:14:43] Stop Those we can stop anything that
[1:14:45] comes after
[1:14:46] we so that's what we talk we're talking
[1:14:48] about the on have no no let me it says
[1:14:52] and no no previous submitted so if
[1:14:54] they're already submitted we this this
[1:14:56] is saying they get stopped no we can't I
[1:14:59] don't think so well that's what this
[1:15:00] says that's clearly what this says we
[1:15:03] can yeah it would I'm sorry this it
[1:15:05] would be suspended based on this new
[1:15:07] legislation you're amending you're
[1:15:09] amending the city code by passing this
[1:15:11] so we go retroactively it can yes can
[1:15:14] and the ordinance we put that in this
[1:15:16] ordinance to go retroactive to the
[1:15:17] application that is on pass we can make
[1:15:19] that more clear is that it's it's
[1:15:21] already in there I
[1:15:23] think we can look at it clarify that
[1:15:26] yeah we might want to clarify that if
[1:15:27] that's the case because that way we
[1:15:28] cover
[1:15:29] ourselves I me and not an open end if
[1:15:32] you don't mind please so that we're
[1:15:34] covered in any way because my
[1:15:36] understanding we discussed it prior to
[1:15:38] this to several more term that we we
[1:15:40] can't deal with the applicational file
[1:15:42] we just have to deal with the new ones
[1:15:44] that that is coming in Mr Williams had
[1:15:47] to stand up I know say it's important to
[1:15:49] make that distinction so if there are
[1:15:50] any individuals who are owning or in the
[1:15:52] process of getting their application
[1:15:53] reviewed for a smoker vate shop I think
[1:15:56] the the discussion around a moratorium I
[1:15:58] think we were all in agreement we're
[1:16:00] saying stop so I think stop a little bit
[1:16:03] essentially is not addressing the issue
[1:16:05] so I do remember Mr Cen previously
[1:16:07] saying that if they were in that review
[1:16:08] process but thank you for the
[1:16:10] clarification I think regardless of what
[1:16:12] state you're in in that review process
[1:16:14] we're saying stop flow is the time to
[1:16:16] review the uh the corridors or the
[1:16:18] overlays and then we will reopen when we
[1:16:21] are are better suited to address some of
[1:16:23] the issues that our committee members
[1:16:24] have
[1:16:28] identified so I just want to um to make
[1:16:31] sure that you know it says cannabis so I
[1:16:34] just want to make sure that legally
[1:16:35] that's something we can do because smoke
[1:16:37] shop and cannabis I remember they you
[1:16:39] said it was like similar uses I want to
[1:16:41] make sure that we can't we can separate
[1:16:43] that out um and not have it in there um
[1:16:47] so that we're not having any difficulty
[1:16:50] regarding that and um so and also I I'll
[1:16:54] give with you and so also so for this
[1:16:58] moratorium we actually have to just we
[1:17:00] can't just pass the moratorium we have
[1:17:01] to actually change our code we can't
[1:17:05] pass the moror with that because that
[1:17:06] that kicks the process down the road a
[1:17:08] little bit well I mean what this
[1:17:10] moratorium does means you you want to
[1:17:13] look at your code you know you don't
[1:17:15] have to do anything during the code I
[1:17:17] mean you because you may decide not to
[1:17:20] do it but you want you're pausing things
[1:17:23] because you're thinking about without
[1:17:25] amending it we can't you the final
[1:17:27] product of the the legislative process
[1:17:30] may not you know not everybody will be
[1:17:32] happy with it I don't know it's it's
[1:17:35] unforeseen but um but the idea is to
[1:17:38] stop it and then allow the legislative
[1:17:42] process to go through and then finally
[1:17:45] adopt it you'll have another public
[1:17:46] hearing on the amending of the zoning
[1:17:48] ordinance so that's what I want to
[1:17:50] clarify um that because Miss barash said
[1:17:52] that this would be like many the code so
[1:17:55] it's really two separate things it's uh
[1:17:57] it's doing the moratorium and then we if
[1:18:00] we wanted to change all the language in
[1:18:01] the code then that that's that's a whole
[1:18:03] separate thing and that's a whole
[1:18:04] another public hearing because it's
[1:18:06] anytime anytime you deal with the you
[1:18:08] know the zoning code or the building
[1:18:10] code or whatever you need to have a
[1:18:11] public hearing so yes so there'll be
[1:18:14] another public hearing once we get
[1:18:17] that legislation together and uh and
[1:18:20] it'll be ready for a public hearing for
[1:18:22] review and comment thank you Mr Farley
[1:18:24] oh I'm sorry did I overlook you miss
[1:18:28] Patrick I can go after Mr Farley Mr
[1:18:30] Farley thank you um so I guess my
[1:18:33] question around so it you know it reads
[1:18:35] no previously admitted applications for
[1:18:37] building permits and land use approvals
[1:18:39] for vape shops smoke Etc I guess my
[1:18:42] question is if someone has put in their
[1:18:45] um application and they have already uh
[1:18:49] got approval but haven't maybe opened
[1:18:53] their vape shop yet or saying that even
[1:18:55] after their approval we're saying if
[1:18:57] they're
[1:18:58] approved they've gotten their
[1:19:00] certificate then they can move forward
[1:19:04] if it's the issue whether they've
[1:19:05] submitted an application or
[1:19:09] not if it's we've approved it um well if
[1:19:13] it's been approved then it would move
[1:19:14] forward but this would this would halt
[1:19:17] anyone to send application process yeah
[1:19:21] okay yes just follow on that because um
[1:19:25] couple months ago we had a enforcement
[1:19:28] process was going on court enforcement
[1:19:30] with the mayor and that was a long runal
[1:19:34] process where they are submitting their
[1:19:35] application they are submitting people
[1:19:37] working find come in compliance so you
[1:19:40] we're saying that all that effort is
[1:19:42] going to come to a preing h because they
[1:19:45] are in the process they are maybe 80%
[1:19:48] 75% I mean based on based on this
[1:19:51] particular language it would if you
[1:19:53] would like something different we can
[1:19:55] amend this language yeah we we we we
[1:19:58] might yeah because we have we have a
[1:20:00] process that's ongo there's an
[1:20:01] enforcement already ongoing from code
[1:20:04] enforcement to bring these shops in
[1:20:06] compliance so by putting that in there
[1:20:09] we'll stop all that effort or bring in
[1:20:11] those business that was we from since
[1:20:13] last year trying to get themselves in
[1:20:15] compliance okay so that was prior to my
[1:20:18] 10 year here so um when you say bring
[1:20:20] them into compliance you mean they open
[1:20:22] they open without
[1:20:25] in the process of getting all that
[1:20:27] documentation and getting inspection and
[1:20:29] the okay so we I want to look at that um
[1:20:33] that report like a date have a
[1:20:38] date we can put a particular date by
[1:20:42] like a cut off date yeah we can look at
[1:20:44] the last
[1:20:46] the I can forward it to you but have a
[1:20:50] copy of the last of the most updated um
[1:20:52] version from code enforcement so that
[1:20:54] way you can attracted by the dates have
[1:20:56] anything to that extent or beyond that
[1:20:59] can be u
[1:21:01] c okay I understand what you're saying
[1:21:04] all right Miss Patrick mran did you want
[1:21:06] to add something just you know I'm
[1:21:07] hearing a lot you know hearing a lot of
[1:21:09] you tweaks to this so I think the best
[1:21:12] practice would probably be take we'll
[1:21:15] take your comments we'll retweet this
[1:21:18] again and then we'll we submit it back
[1:21:20] to you for you know a final review based
[1:21:24] on your comment you provided here to and
[1:21:26] for us to uh research some other aspects
[1:21:29] that you all brought up this evening
[1:21:31] okay Miss Patrick well I mean if
[1:21:35] somebody is open
[1:21:38] illegally I'm okay with them not being
[1:21:42] able to keep going with the process I
[1:21:44] mean I think we should shut them down um
[1:21:47] is that I I is that what you're saying
[1:21:49] you're saying they they they still have
[1:21:51] the chance to continue open Cote
[1:21:53] enforcements bringing them into
[1:21:55] compliance and that was the document
[1:21:56] that was shared to us so we need to know
[1:21:59] where they are in terms of that and then
[1:22:00] there should be a cut off period as to
[1:22:02] say exactly this is the date that is cut
[1:22:05] off anybody beyond that they have to
[1:22:08] wait on the 6 months moratorium and
[1:22:10] follow the new zoning
[1:22:13] rules so sometimes uh I mean often times
[1:22:18] people
[1:22:19] submit uh for certificates of use and
[1:22:21] they're denied and they have to resubmit
[1:22:24] so
[1:22:25] so there
[1:22:27] may they there may be businesses that
[1:22:30] have
[1:22:31] pending applications for certificates of
[1:22:34] use that will ultimately be denied but
[1:22:37] if this were to pass if you were to pass
[1:22:40] this they wouldn't be able to
[1:22:44] Reit so I mean again we can change the
[1:22:47] language we just need to understand what
[1:22:49] language you're looking for specifically
[1:22:52] like what's your intent on something
[1:22:53] like that okay Mr Toro um just in the in
[1:22:57] the updated sheet that Mr mudaron did
[1:22:59] provide to us I'd say out of how many
[1:23:02] were on there I don't think any of them
[1:23:03] have in 6 months have even bothered to
[1:23:05] try to come into compliance maybe one or
[1:23:07] two yeah there a few there a few of them
[1:23:09] they still working couple but otherwise
[1:23:12] we really haven't heard from any of them
[1:23:14] may and there is a wide
[1:23:18] variance in that where people have
[1:23:20] opened and haven't followed any of the
[1:23:22] rules and then so the Corporation
[1:23:25] Council points out they're Summit of
[1:23:26] open they may have technical issues or
[1:23:29] paperwork isn't quite to what we'd like
[1:23:32] and so we try and work with them to
[1:23:34] bring it up to a level of compliance and
[1:23:37] the only other thing uh would submit to
[1:23:39] you talking about a 90day moreor here is
[1:23:43] actually pick a date is it 90 days from
[1:23:46] the day the council passed it is 90 days
[1:23:48] that the mayor signs it is it 90 days
[1:23:50] when it goes back to the cour to be
[1:23:51] filed some sort mhm you know do the end
[1:23:55] of May or maybe the 1 of June I think
[1:23:58] that would be a little bit over 90 days
[1:24:00] but something so it's a clear reference
[1:24:03] uh so that internally for our controls
[1:24:05] than just the public knowing what the
[1:24:08] deadlines are okay Mr far yeah I just I
[1:24:11] just think that uh given deference to
[1:24:14] Corporation Council I I think that their
[1:24:15] idea around taking you know the new
[1:24:18] information that some of us have shared
[1:24:19] here and being giving them an
[1:24:21] opportunity to um research any issues
[1:24:23] that have been raised and kind of um to
[1:24:25] clean it up a little bit and present it
[1:24:26] back to us for lack better ter I think
[1:24:28] that there I would just agree with that
[1:24:30] course of action thank you um
[1:24:34] so it looks like that's what's that's
[1:24:36] going to happen this point so and this
[1:24:38] is just generally um I think that we
[1:24:41] should be looking at all certificate of
[1:24:43] occupancy not just these particular ones
[1:24:45] and and and with is everyone in
[1:24:47] compliance because I'm not I'm not bad
[1:24:49] I'm not going for S but as May mentioned
[1:24:51] the last time but I I I'm sure that I'm
[1:24:54] not I'm more than sure that there are
[1:24:56] some businesses out there that don't
[1:24:58] have a certificate of occupancy so as
[1:25:00] we're talking about I know we're
[1:25:02] focusing on this just one particular
[1:25:04] type of business but that relates to all
[1:25:07] businesses and so as we're doing that
[1:25:09] enforcement or just talking to people
[1:25:10] and say bringing you know you need to
[1:25:13] bring um this you need to bring this up
[1:25:15] to have a signific of occupancy which
[1:25:18] generates into Revenue so I think that
[1:25:21] we should be looking at all of them and
[1:25:23] I know that something's code enforcement
[1:25:25] but I just really want to make sure that
[1:25:26] we put that out there that we're just
[1:25:27] not focusing on one particular business
[1:25:30] does in everyone the same rule applies
[1:25:33] in terms of certificate occupancy so I
[1:25:35] think we're just at this moment talking
[1:25:38] specifically about those types of
[1:25:39] businesses because that's what the
[1:25:41] moratorium deals with um I can say you
[1:25:44] know in corporation council's office
[1:25:46] that you know we are reviewing
[1:25:48] certificates of use and we apply the
[1:25:50] same um you know we we look at the same
[1:25:54] way under the suspend our review well
[1:25:58] really what I'm talking about code
[1:25:59] enforcement making sure that they get to
[1:26:00] you that's really that so everyone has
[1:26:03] one whatever the process is beginning
[1:26:05] whatever the beginning process is that
[1:26:06] we need to make sure that we're engaging
[1:26:08] in that
[1:26:10] sure Mr M just are you moving your hand
[1:26:13] around saying
[1:26:15] hi so we we we will take into
[1:26:18] consideration all the comments over here
[1:26:20] and then put them into the draft and
[1:26:21] then send them back to us with regards
[1:26:22] to looking at the the app that we
[1:26:24] haven't filed the enforcement that is
[1:26:26] currently in place from code enforcement
[1:26:29] in terms of looking at the Timeline when
[1:26:30] those application was filed and look at
[1:26:33] the draft to kind of cut that off that
[1:26:36] your
[1:26:36] time yes and um like the mayor said we
[1:26:40] we try to work with businesses to get
[1:26:43] them into compliance however there may
[1:26:45] be here and there uh
[1:26:47] if if their application is
[1:26:50] denied and they have to resubmit it may
[1:26:53] be after after this date and they may
[1:26:55] not be able to for the 90 days
[1:26:59] well when we say deny we we can deny for
[1:27:01] a simple letter from the state or deny a
[1:27:04] simple letter from the country so we
[1:27:05] have to look into into those
[1:27:07] consideration yeah we I'm I guess I'm
[1:27:10] saying if their application for
[1:27:13] certificate of use is not sufficient if
[1:27:15] it doesn't meet all the requirements set
[1:27:16] forth in the code um sometimes we're
[1:27:19] able to get have them Rectify it but
[1:27:21] sometimes based on it depends on what
[1:27:23] the particular ISS issue is some issues
[1:27:25] cannot be rectified in the current
[1:27:27] application and they have to resubmit um
[1:27:30] so I'm just saying
[1:27:33] that the some of the businesses that
[1:27:35] you're referring to I don't I don't know
[1:27:36] I have to look go back and look at
[1:27:38] everything that's pending but if they
[1:27:40] were to be denied uh if it's not
[1:27:42] something that can be corrected in the
[1:27:44] current application it could be after
[1:27:47] the moreor takes effect and then they
[1:27:49] would not be able okay so I would like
[1:27:52] if we can just add the into the draft if
[1:27:53] it cannot corrected then they
[1:27:56] automatically U get denied then okay
[1:27:58] then I okay yeah we I can share that um
[1:28:02] that recort that we got from the M sure
[1:28:04] okay Mr ble do you have a hand up
[1:28:08] no yeah just to you final clarification
[1:28:11] that this
[1:28:13] moratorium is dealing with building
[1:28:15] permits and certificates of occupancy
[1:28:17] certificat of use and land land use
[1:28:20] approvals limited to smoke shops Vape
[1:28:24] shops and to Tobacco or VAP Vape
[1:28:27] consumption businesses as the state has
[1:28:30] as they have no Statewide regulation so
[1:28:32] just to clarify that point this
[1:28:34] moratorium is as you all brought out
[1:28:36] it's just dealing with those areas and
[1:28:39] that's what it's dealing with and then
[1:28:42] we'll tweak it as far as end date tweak
[1:28:44] it on the certific you know application
[1:28:47] dates for for for people who put their
[1:28:49] applications in and uh and we'll bring
[1:28:52] it back to you okay are there more
[1:28:55] questions Mr Williams yes I just had a
[1:28:57] comment and I wanted to intentionally
[1:28:59] say like with respect to the no
[1:29:00] previously submitted applications I do
[1:29:02] find myself in agreement with Miss uh
[1:29:04] Patrick and Mr Toro and I think the
[1:29:06] conversation of us even discussing a
[1:29:08] moratorium highlights that we are no
[1:29:10] longer able to effectively enforce this
[1:29:12] so I think saying that you're going to
[1:29:15] stop the uh opening of more uh uh vapor
[1:29:20] smoke chops including the other areas
[1:29:22] but then allowing some additionals to
[1:29:24] work their way through the review
[1:29:25] process I think we're we're we're
[1:29:26] sending two different messages to the
[1:29:27] community um even with the process of
[1:29:30] the law office reviewing it and giving
[1:29:31] us revisions that is additional time for
[1:29:33] people to come into compliance so I just
[1:29:35] urge anyone listening to heed that we
[1:29:38] are discussing this and to take that
[1:29:40] into consideration and hopefully those
[1:29:42] individuals are talking to you but I
[1:29:43] think ultimately is this going to affect
[1:29:45] certain businesses absolutely but we're
[1:29:47] not saying no forever it is just no for
[1:29:49] the 90 days for us to review it if that
[1:29:52] makes sense
[1:29:56] so I just want to make sure that we're
[1:29:57] clear that so because I'm like I'm a
[1:30:01] little concerned and if we can if
[1:30:03] there's Pro if there's people alreadying
[1:30:04] process if we're on good legal standing
[1:30:06] quite frankly to be able to do that when
[1:30:08] they've gone to the process the last
[1:30:10] thing we want to do is pass something
[1:30:12] that brings us uh you know somebody
[1:30:13] brings up a lawsuit they can't do this
[1:30:15] because and all these reasons so I want
[1:30:17] to make sure we're on good legal
[1:30:18] standing I do have a concern that people
[1:30:21] who are in the process not that I'm I'm
[1:30:23] not uh advocating uh for this particular
[1:30:26] type of business but I also want to make
[1:30:28] sure that we are not targeting and and
[1:30:30] and going against this type of business
[1:30:32] specifically so God bless you so if
[1:30:35] we're um if I so I have some concerns
[1:30:38] that are people in the process that we
[1:30:40] just shut them down like that because
[1:30:42] they went into the process with the
[1:30:44] understanding that you know you need to
[1:30:46] do ABC so I just really want to be clear
[1:30:49] that we're okay doing that when people
[1:30:51] are already in the process extremely
[1:30:52] important that we're doing that
[1:30:54] Mr car I I I want to say I I share your
[1:30:57] concern around that I think that um
[1:30:59] listening to um what our community has
[1:31:01] been telling us and what we can see you
[1:31:03] know moving around our city ourselves
[1:31:05] there's definitely we've seen an influx
[1:31:07] of of these businesses um kind of
[1:31:09] popping up and um a lot of them aren't
[1:31:11] you know are not in compliance um but I
[1:31:14] do uh I'm definitely not advocating um
[1:31:16] based on you know this business based on
[1:31:19] information that that that's been shared
[1:31:20] with us um but I am also I'm a little
[1:31:23] concerned about someone who entered the
[1:31:25] process in good faith and is like
[1:31:27] working towards um getting their uh
[1:31:31] appropriate documents in order then
[1:31:33] telling them
[1:31:35] that no kind of stopping them in that
[1:31:38] way so I just think that that's
[1:31:39] something that we need
[1:31:40] to think about yes Miss Patrick except I
[1:31:43] think that we are trying to stop the
[1:31:45] influx of these types of this is
[1:31:47] specific to this type of business and I
[1:31:49] think that we have been for months
[1:31:51] talking about this and talking about the
[1:31:53] health risks especially to our youth um
[1:31:57] and so I I mean it's really a fine line
[1:32:01] I get that um but at the same time I
[1:32:04] think we've identified we've heard from
[1:32:06] business owners we've heard from I mean
[1:32:09] you know that it's you you can see you
[1:32:11] can see just go to Upper Union Street as
[1:32:13] an example and you can see that it's
[1:32:15] affecting the businesses around the
[1:32:17] other stores so I think we are
[1:32:19] specifically targeting to your point we
[1:32:22] are specifically targeting these stores
[1:32:24] we are making a judgment call here that
[1:32:26] these particular stores are
[1:32:29] affecting um neighborhoods are affecting
[1:32:33] business districts are affecting Health
[1:32:36] um of residents um and so I do want to
[1:32:40] say that yeah we are I mean that's what
[1:32:42] this is so rather than thinking about
[1:32:44] all of our businesses we are saying
[1:32:46] smoke and vape shops here um we've had
[1:32:50] numerous presentations by uh the Smoke
[1:32:53] free New York people about about this
[1:32:58] um I I think you know I hear what the
[1:33:02] mayor's saying about a date but I mean
[1:33:03] if we have to now wait two more
[1:33:06] weeks to get we are going to have to
[1:33:08] wait two more weeks to get this back now
[1:33:11] um so when do we start yeah no I get
[1:33:14] that I know what I'm just saying I mean
[1:33:16] you know I mean when do we get to so the
[1:33:19] previously submitted applications if
[1:33:21] they're not open yet as stores
[1:33:24] you know do we want them to open um you
[1:33:28] know I'm kind of thinking we don't want
[1:33:29] them to open um I hear what you're
[1:33:31] saying I do um and believe me I remember
[1:33:35] you know before I was on Council there
[1:33:37] was discussion here because of some
[1:33:39] liquor stores that were um on the Block
[1:33:42] um you know at that at that time as well
[1:33:45] um but so we are making a judgment right
[1:33:48] but I want to make sure we're on good
[1:33:49] legal standing I want to make sure that
[1:33:51] there's not but I think yeah so we do
[1:33:53] need that clarification about the
[1:33:55] previous new submitted applications and
[1:33:57] I do think that we should put June 1 for
[1:34:00] example as an end date if that's the
[1:34:03] date that we all agree on that's my
[1:34:05] last Mr Farley no I I I just want to
[1:34:08] kind of Echo and amen lot what you were
[1:34:11] saying because I I I agree with the what
[1:34:13] what our communities are telling us and
[1:34:14] the information and presentations that
[1:34:16] we have uh uh been having and you know a
[1:34:19] lot of um good information so I agree
[1:34:21] that these you know these are not not uh
[1:34:24] type of businesses that we want um
[1:34:27] popping up everywhere the way they are I
[1:34:28] just think that there is a balance that
[1:34:31] we have to be mindful of for any
[1:34:34] business that's operating or is entering
[1:34:38] into an agreement in good faith with the
[1:34:40] city even if it's a business that we
[1:34:42] don't necessarily um um personally
[1:34:45] aren't fond of you know if someone is is
[1:34:47] is entering in good in a good faith
[1:34:49] effort thus far to kind of retroactively
[1:34:53] say no I just you know it's one of those
[1:34:56] things
[1:34:57] that you know do you know if if it's the
[1:35:01] right thing to do but do we have the
[1:35:03] right to do it kind of thing you know
[1:35:04] what I mean that's
[1:35:06] right that's where we need the
[1:35:09] recommendation to look at and see I'm
[1:35:13] sorry I just have to say this that
[1:35:14] because people have complained to me
[1:35:16] that we're like talking over each other
[1:35:17] so one voice thank you so um and that's
[1:35:20] what I asked for look into that and get
[1:35:22] back to us because um do we have the
[1:35:24] legal capacity to kind of like shut them
[1:35:27] off despite the fact that they submitted
[1:35:28] six months ago y if we can do that
[1:35:31] that's fine if we can then we need to
[1:35:33] address them one by one and just you
[1:35:35] know tell them exactly that they're not
[1:35:38] they're not in compliance because of
[1:35:40] documentation or they just need
[1:35:42] to do you have something more Miss
[1:35:44] Patrick
[1:35:47] mayor okay Mr Toro did you have more
[1:35:51] okay so Mr M I just wanted to to um I'm
[1:35:53] sorry gentlemen you more William Mr
[1:35:56] parley okay so what you're asking the
[1:35:58] mayor to provide is no I'm not asking um
[1:36:03] we'll be able can we get another update
[1:36:05] on that spreadsheet to see where they
[1:36:06] are in terms of any movement there could
[1:36:08] be movement on that sheet so yes the
[1:36:11] last can see and that hopefully there is
[1:36:12] movement every day unfortunately there
[1:36:14] are places that are opening every
[1:36:18] day also so we we'll see the ones that
[1:36:21] we have't filed where they are and if
[1:36:23] they not not U making any good faith
[1:36:25] effort to continue the process or not
[1:36:27] filing the documents then they are those
[1:36:29] are the ones that will have to
[1:36:30] eventually
[1:36:32] um put them out of business
[1:36:34] unfortunately and so so mayor just a
[1:36:37] question so we are um the ones that are
[1:36:38] already open we we're having code
[1:36:40] enforcement visit to see that they're in
[1:36:42] compliance CU there is there are a lot
[1:36:44] of them that there I think nobody can
[1:36:46] disagree there are there a lot so code
[1:36:48] enforcement is still doing
[1:36:50] that okay and when you have that list if
[1:36:54] you're out the neighborhoods and you see
[1:36:55] something that's not on the list send
[1:36:58] that in also some these good idea
[1:37:01] entirely
[1:37:03] bypass the
[1:37:05] system that's a good
[1:37:08] idea okay so
[1:37:13] um is there any more discussion on that
[1:37:17] okay so Mr uh O'Brien will'll see this
[1:37:19] back in two weeks with the tweaks yes or
[1:37:21] we'll see the tweaks before that right
[1:37:23] we'll see the twe you'll see it
[1:37:25] beforehand for your we'll we'll bring
[1:37:27] this back to discuss it in two weeks all
[1:37:30] right thank you very
[1:37:32] much um so item number six is um
[1:37:36] proceeding to uh recover possession of
[1:37:38] real property I mean I'm sorry home rule
[1:37:40] request and support of Bill number a
[1:37:43] 7556 s
[1:37:45] 7547 requiring a petition in a summary
[1:37:48] proceeding to recover possession of real
[1:37:50] property incity to allege proof of
[1:37:52] compliance with local laws requiring
[1:37:54] rental residential property registration
[1:37:57] and licensure and mayor
[1:38:00] McCarthy thank you madam president this
[1:38:02] is something passed
[1:38:05] before what this would do is require
[1:38:10] anybody who is starting an eviction
[1:38:14] proceeding they have to be compliant
[1:38:16] with the rental
[1:38:17] certificate so that if you haven't
[1:38:20] gotten the rental certificate and you're
[1:38:23] department is in non-compliance you
[1:38:25] would not be able to evict somebody it's
[1:38:28] unfortunate today we have what I believe
[1:38:31] is a good policy in place we have a
[1:38:35] large number of landlords who comply
[1:38:38] with it there unfortunately are still a
[1:38:41] significant number who don't comply with
[1:38:44] it and those tend to be ones that there
[1:38:46] may be other problems uh and people
[1:38:51] sometimes are put in vulnerable
[1:38:53] situations ations and this will get our
[1:38:58] compliance rate up hopefully to a higher
[1:39:00] level and also allow us to uh help
[1:39:04] ensure that safe and decent housing is
[1:39:06] made available in the city of skincity
[1:39:08] across the board to everybody so um so
[1:39:12] is there an online process for um for
[1:39:14] people to be able to do
[1:39:16] this we still do an inspection too so
[1:39:19] yes you
[1:39:20] can start the application but there's an
[1:39:23] inspection process so and the reason
[1:39:26] because when this was on the agenda so I
[1:39:28] got a call from someone who lives out of
[1:39:30] town so they have a person here that you
[1:39:32] know takes care of their property so
[1:39:33] they can do it online they have to do
[1:39:36] rental there's to be an agent to and so
[1:39:38] they have an agent right so they can do
[1:39:40] it online but their agent needs to be
[1:39:41] present here for um but we still have to
[1:39:43] do an inspection of the property yes
[1:39:46] right so their agent could could let you
[1:39:47] and doesn't have to be the owner of the
[1:39:49] property necessarily and we're looking
[1:39:51] all the time to how you put more things
[1:39:52] online make them more user
[1:39:55] friendly okay thank you just wanted to
[1:39:58] make sure we had an online
[1:40:00] process uh so any further questions
[1:40:02] regarding that yes Mr Williams I think
[1:40:06] comment just to put some thought behind
[1:40:07] it I think we had uh the department of
[1:40:10] uh HUD came and did a presentation at
[1:40:12] syum a few months ago and very much it's
[1:40:15] how do you get this information to the
[1:40:17] people that it affects um cuz I think
[1:40:19] often times they're functioning without
[1:40:21] this understanding and still being taken
[1:40:23] advant vage of uh I agree and support
[1:40:26] this moving forward um but just trying
[1:40:29] to put some thought behind is there any
[1:40:30] way we can just push this narrative to
[1:40:32] the community either put it out in uh
[1:40:34] local libraries or just some way to make
[1:40:37] uh tenants and both landlords like fully
[1:40:38] aware of this process so they have this
[1:40:40] information ahead of having to start
[1:40:42] this
[1:40:44] process so is there a marketing
[1:40:47] piece I'll do that with we don't have
[1:40:51] one right now but yes more than will to
[1:40:54] put something together and it's part of
[1:40:55] the messaging we're looking at modifying
[1:40:58] the trash collection rules other
[1:41:01] things Michelle had put together a
[1:41:03] summary really recently just the process
[1:41:06] to open a business so that people kind
[1:41:09] of know it but you know there's a simple
[1:41:12] checklist that people can walk down
[1:41:15] and do it with a level of comfort they
[1:41:18] know what they have to do when they have
[1:41:19] to do it to uh get to where they want to
[1:41:22] be so
[1:41:23] Mr Williams that yes an education
[1:41:26] component is always key to making things
[1:41:29] successful Mr will was your handle yes I
[1:41:32] was saying um yeah we can we can reach
[1:41:34] out to The Landlord Association and to
[1:41:36] help them to to drive this to us because
[1:41:38] this is a important piece of legislation
[1:41:41] in terms of safety because I will tell
[1:41:43] you that there are apartment there that
[1:41:45] doesn't have inspection and people are
[1:41:46] not living in the the safety standard
[1:41:48] that it's supposed to be living in and
[1:41:50] um it's a problem over there so this l
[1:41:53] legislation and hope it passed the
[1:41:54] assembly and can be enforced locally by
[1:41:57] LS will bring all these um landlord into
[1:42:00] compliance and make sure that they have
[1:42:02] a safe and livable apartment for for
[1:42:04] tenants out there and I think landlord
[1:42:07] um should not feel that they're victim
[1:42:09] of this it's protecting them also by
[1:42:12] having a rental certificate in in code
[1:42:14] enforcement and is filed there it give
[1:42:16] them the legal uper hand on the legal
[1:42:18] side to say that their apartment was um
[1:42:21] you know legally um
[1:42:23] compliance they were inspected pass and
[1:42:26] a tenant is living there and now there
[1:42:28] are some issues and concern it's a
[1:42:31] different ball game so I think it's um
[1:42:33] they will benefit more by having um a
[1:42:36] rental certificates on filed for each
[1:42:38] tenant that occupy those
[1:42:41] apartments Mr BR yeah I was just going
[1:42:44] to again kind of add on to that and just
[1:42:46] say that I think that what we're doing
[1:42:47] here this is a really really again
[1:42:49] important piece of legislation and I
[1:42:51] think that often times um some of our
[1:42:53] most vulnerable uh uh population within
[1:42:57] our city um are some some of the people
[1:42:59] who are taking advantage of um and kind
[1:43:02] of live in that substandard housing
[1:43:04] situation so I think that you know one
[1:43:07] of the byproducts of that is you know
[1:43:10] safe housing but and and we also just
[1:43:12] have to keep asking ourselves the right
[1:43:14] questions around how do we make coming
[1:43:16] into compliance um you know easy and
[1:43:19] accessible for landlords because what we
[1:43:22] want to do is
[1:43:23] is is make it as user friendly as we can
[1:43:27] to come to compliance so then if
[1:43:28] somebody is not in compliance then we
[1:43:31] kind of know you know we've done our
[1:43:33] part so I just want to say I I support
[1:43:35] this fully and hopefully this uh goes
[1:43:38] through so I just did you Mr T just
[1:43:41] agree Mr okay so are you asking for a
[1:43:45] resolution or a um something in support
[1:43:47] of this is home rule legislation okay so
[1:43:51] you're asking for home rule or just a
[1:43:52] resolution supportive you're ask for the
[1:43:54] home but it's a home rule process so the
[1:43:57] bills have been introduced this is one
[1:43:59] we did before didn't quite go as smooth
[1:44:01] as we would have liked so it's to redo
[1:44:04] it again to actually get the legislation
[1:44:07] enacted so you want The Home Room okay
[1:44:09] so um I need a
[1:44:11] motion Mr M your hand up or you no I was
[1:44:15] just going to make a comment to say that
[1:44:16] um when we're passing this home rule I
[1:44:18] think there are two here that make sure
[1:44:19] that we have all the mechanism in place
[1:44:21] to make sure that we processes and file
[1:44:24] for the state and I drop the ball on
[1:44:28] them and I hope that the council and May
[1:44:31] and his staff can work together so that
[1:44:33] we have this file with a relevant um
[1:44:35] agency in the
[1:44:38] Aly so moved
[1:44:40] second all those in favor
[1:44:43] all item number seven is the ceremonial
[1:44:46] resolution recognizing women's History
[1:44:49] Month yes so March is women's History
[1:44:51] Month this year um um and we've been
[1:44:54] doing this for the last X number of
[1:44:56] years uh the ceremonial resolution about
[1:44:58] March this year um the theme for uh
[1:45:02] women's history month is women who
[1:45:04] advocate for Equity diversity and
[1:45:06] inclusion um so I just would like to be
[1:45:09] able to have a ceremonial resolution
[1:45:11] recognizing March as women's history Mar
[1:45:14] any discussion how second second second
[1:45:19] all in favor I thank you right um there
[1:45:23] is a couple other things I wanted to um
[1:45:25] bring before before we go to Executive
[1:45:27] session uh the first one is I'm
[1:45:29] requesting the council to consider doing
[1:45:31] a ceremonial resolution for uh James
[1:45:34] Griffin he's an employee whose last day
[1:45:36] will be the 28th and he's a 40-year
[1:45:39] employee I want to publicly thank the um
[1:45:43] staff person this their coworker in the
[1:45:45] city who brought this to um my attention
[1:45:48] that they felt that their employee their
[1:45:50] um colleague deserved some recognition
[1:45:53] after having it put in four decades with
[1:45:54] the city of SKC uh which I I
[1:45:57] wholeheartedly agree with so I would
[1:45:59] just ask the council to consider um us
[1:46:01] putting together a ceremonial resolution
[1:46:03] for Mr
[1:46:07] gin I'm the second all in
[1:46:11] favor Mr M I will ask you are you still
[1:46:15] interest yeah I I'd like to um to ask
[1:46:17] for consideration to add a CR to
[1:46:20] recognize U Metro Ford for vehicle
[1:46:23] donation towards our Police Department
[1:46:25] so use with our community um police um
[1:46:29] officer program through our school
[1:46:31] district so the see to recognize their
[1:46:33] valuable contribution um to the what is
[1:46:36] it Mustang M he the people who out there
[1:46:38] have an opportunity to to visit it with
[1:46:42] the mayor Mr Toro and that's a wonderful
[1:46:44] guest you're from uh Metro for and a CR
[1:46:47] would go a along way to recognize their
[1:46:49] contribution towards our
[1:46:51] city so move second all in favor I leave
[1:46:56] out of that where council member Doro
[1:46:58] was spinning the wheels no we can't I
[1:47:01] can't say
[1:47:02] that 0 to 60 fast Mr does it go from 0
[1:47:07] to
[1:47:08] 60 the answer was
[1:47:11] fast all right sry so move in second
[1:47:15] where I set yes okay so then there's one
[1:47:18] other last thing that I want to stress
[1:47:19] that we came up at our meeting last
[1:47:21] Thursday and we having discussions about
[1:47:24] um the community benefits agreement we
[1:47:26] got an email from the mayor that there
[1:47:27] had already been one that was entered
[1:47:29] into um so that was signed the same day
[1:47:32] that we're having our discussions and um
[1:47:35] I would just like to us to have the
[1:47:37] opportunity because what I read there
[1:47:38] are some things in there that were
[1:47:40] discussed that um that weren't included
[1:47:44] so I'd like to know if there's an
[1:47:45] opportunity to revisit that and to add
[1:47:47] those things and um I just have to
[1:47:49] really ask we were having that
[1:47:51] discussion but it was signed on the same
[1:47:52] day so I just um I guess I'm a little
[1:47:55] perplexed as to why that wasn't you know
[1:47:58] if it was already signed that we were
[1:48:00] having those discussions and it was
[1:48:02] already it was already done so um that
[1:48:05] that's my question
[1:48:07] there given the authorization to enter
[1:48:10] into a contract I've moved ahead with it
[1:48:14] council's still looking at the aspects
[1:48:17] of uh Community benefits agreement uh
[1:48:21] Union develop ER County are open to
[1:48:25] discussion on that there's things that
[1:48:27] were Incorporated from the County's
[1:48:29] aspects there's things that are
[1:48:30] Incorporated from the city's aspects and
[1:48:32] I look at it as a dynamic process but
[1:48:35] want the project to move
[1:48:37] ahead okay well go ahead no I was just
[1:48:41] going to say that I know I'm this is
[1:48:43] almost kind of a quote unquote kind of
[1:48:45] good problem to have because this is as
[1:48:47] a result of us moving forward with a
[1:48:49] project that's going to benefit our city
[1:48:51] um I just see this as more of a a a a a
[1:48:55] starting point and I think that if both
[1:48:57] parties or all parties involved seem to
[1:48:59] be open um to um getting feedback from
[1:49:03] the community and um more voices I think
[1:49:07] that that's that that will benefit this
[1:49:09] process and I think that as long as all
[1:49:12] parties are seem really uh interested in
[1:49:16] in having a meaningful Community
[1:49:18] benefits package that this isn't you
[1:49:20] know something that you know we we
[1:49:22] couldn't amend along the way in fact I
[1:49:24] think that we'd be well suited to do so
[1:49:26] in order to be more responsive to the
[1:49:28] community so I just second that that
[1:49:30] this is something a good starting point
[1:49:32] and we should kind of look at this as a
[1:49:34] living document living process moving
[1:49:36] forward and your hand
[1:49:39] up
[1:49:40] did I was going to but oh okay you do
[1:49:44] you don't so um adding on um my inut I
[1:49:49] think we're having a really candid
[1:49:51] thoughtful conversation and I think for
[1:49:53] myself it's understanding how a
[1:49:55] community could submit to uh Community
[1:49:57] benefits agreements so I think in your
[1:49:58] comments you said that you'd be uh open
[1:50:01] to having those merge and then I've
[1:50:03] heard the comment of like Dynamic and
[1:50:04] living so I hope that as a city we'd be
[1:50:07] able to submit one document reflective
[1:50:09] of the interest and needs for the
[1:50:11] neighborhoods as again I think just
[1:50:12] having multiple iterations just it seems
[1:50:15] convoluted and almost in an aspect like
[1:50:17] Waters Waters down the importance of
[1:50:19] having
[1:50:21] it well quite frankly you know we went
[1:50:24] through a budget process where the
[1:50:25] council pushed the budget back where it
[1:50:28] was the latest budget we've ever had in
[1:50:29] the history of the city there are three
[1:50:31] items on the agenda tonight that should
[1:50:34] have been enacted last year they're not
[1:50:37] we got to go through another cycle uh
[1:50:40] the other item with the uh sidewalk
[1:50:43] again the council didn't that that in a
[1:50:45] timely manner so I look forward to
[1:50:48] working with you but I'm going to move
[1:50:51] some things ahead maybe a manner that
[1:50:53] you find uh less than desirable but I
[1:50:57] got to manage the city I got to keep
[1:50:58] moving projects so that they're actually
[1:51:00] happening and we're getting results so
[1:51:03] again I look forward to working with you
[1:51:05] look at it's a dynamic process that
[1:51:08] project is exciting other communities
[1:51:11] would are envious that we're doing it
[1:51:13] here and it's going to create
[1:51:15] opportunities that we don't even think
[1:51:17] of
[1:51:18] today I I don't disagree with um that um
[1:51:22] but I just think that communication is
[1:51:24] important and if this process was
[1:51:25] already you felt like you were being
[1:51:27] delayed and taken too long that to to
[1:51:29] have communicated that to the council
[1:51:31] and that did not come forward and then
[1:51:33] then we would know that the mayor feels
[1:51:34] like we need to you know move more
[1:51:35] quickly because based on what we did we
[1:51:37] had a meeting we we we then um called
[1:51:40] for our next meeting and everybody knew
[1:51:42] when that was going to be so if it was
[1:51:44] going to something happening before just
[1:51:45] communication to the council and um I
[1:51:48] know that you pointed out like all these
[1:51:50] things didn't happen so all this does
[1:51:51] not rest with the counc I have to say
[1:51:53] that some of that rests with the staff
[1:51:54] but we're not here to we we as a council
[1:51:57] said that we're going to work together
[1:51:58] collectively and along with you and
[1:52:00] that's what we really want to do but you
[1:52:02] know communication to us I'm certainly
[1:52:04] my phone is the same it's you know you
[1:52:07] can get emails just that we communicate
[1:52:09] so that we really are working together
[1:52:11] as working together works and that's you
[1:52:13] know that's the saying that's being put
[1:52:14] out there so that's all I'm asking for
[1:52:16] is that we just have that information
[1:52:17] communicated to us so we can act
[1:52:19] accordingly and again I will say that we
[1:52:22] talk about the past but no one's perfect
[1:52:25] at this table so um we have made a a
[1:52:28] very firm commitment about moving
[1:52:30] forward and I think that's what we
[1:52:31] should do and not necessarily just
[1:52:33] scratch the RS and scabs of the
[1:52:35] past Mr is your pen up yeah yeah well
[1:52:39] sure sure yeah thank you so I just I I
[1:52:42] just would uh um kind of highlight the
[1:52:45] fact that this is not an opportunity
[1:52:47] that has uh fled us at all I think that
[1:52:50] this is um you know again we still have
[1:52:52] opportunity to um bring you know um any
[1:52:55] of the suggestions that have been
[1:52:56] discussed at the table of the council um
[1:52:58] I think that uh all the parties involved
[1:53:01] seem to be um pretty intentional about
[1:53:03] wanting a a robust Community benefits
[1:53:06] package so again as we have amended
[1:53:10] other documents to better suit and
[1:53:12] practices to better suit the Deeds of
[1:53:14] the community I would say that this is
[1:53:16] that this is no different and if we
[1:53:18] focus on kind of looking forward to this
[1:53:20] you know how do we just you know make
[1:53:22] sure we we getting some of the things
[1:53:24] that um you know that the the the
[1:53:27] existing benefits agreement didn't um
[1:53:29] include um things like you know uh
[1:53:32] vendor opportunities for mwbe um you
[1:53:35] know there's a you know what the
[1:53:37] existing package covered a lot of good
[1:53:39] things and was really aligned with some
[1:53:40] of the conversations that I've heard so
[1:53:42] I think it's good but I think that we
[1:53:43] definitely um need to just makeing sure
[1:53:47] that the process is a more inclusive one
[1:53:49] moving
[1:53:51] forward and with the also inclusive of
[1:53:53] the community because that it's called
[1:53:55] the community benefits agreement so I
[1:53:56] think that we also need to hear a little
[1:53:57] bit more Community voice as we move
[1:53:59] forward and not all everything just come
[1:54:01] from this table I mean I did mention
[1:54:03] that my the comments that I brought
[1:54:05] forward were at a community meeting I
[1:54:07] was I was at but that wasn't called
[1:54:09] specifically for that purpose but I did
[1:54:11] it because I was there in the community
[1:54:12] was present so I think that if we um by
[1:54:15] VAR its veryy nature Community benefits
[1:54:17] agreement need to include some some
[1:54:19] input from input from the community it
[1:54:21] just makes sense I appreciate you
[1:54:22] bringing forward about the mwbe and also
[1:54:25] local hire as we're doing all these
[1:54:27] projects then you know to have make sure
[1:54:29] that uh the people who are who live here
[1:54:32] uh locally are able to benefit from some
[1:54:34] of the job opportunities that will come
[1:54:36] forward from the construction it's going
[1:54:37] to be a very major $50 million
[1:54:39] construction project so to see some of
[1:54:42] make sure that money um circulates
[1:54:44] within the within the city I'm just
[1:54:45] going to be real specific within the
[1:54:47] city um I think is is really important
[1:54:49] and something that we want to make sure
[1:54:51] that we move forward just one more
[1:54:52] really quick thing I just want to again
[1:54:54] just talk about the fact that you know
[1:54:56] we seem like we're we're in a really
[1:54:57] good place with this project and the and
[1:54:59] the the the developer you again
[1:55:02] obviously Us in the city everyone sees
[1:55:05] why a a community benefits package is an
[1:55:08] important thing and I think that you
[1:55:10] know we I anticipate
[1:55:13] uh a pretty smooth process um raising
[1:55:17] more ways that this can benefit our
[1:55:19] community I think that's the whole
[1:55:20] that's been the spirit of this entire
[1:55:21] project so I just want to highlight that
[1:55:25] again Mr M yeah I just want to add to
[1:55:28] that I mean um I what I would like to
[1:55:30] suggest is that um we should based on
[1:55:32] the discussion that we had the last
[1:55:34] meeting we should move forward with we
[1:55:36] um a draft of the community benefit
[1:55:38] agreement that we had discussed and
[1:55:40] pretty much lay on the table and to look
[1:55:43] forward and see if we can able to amend
[1:55:45] it and resubmit it into that package
[1:55:48] that was already submitted so can I work
[1:55:50] on a draft get a draft on discuss it
[1:55:52] that was agreed on and let's see if we
[1:55:55] can um amend that version it'll be good
[1:55:58] I mean look all of us support this
[1:55:59] project and I think it's good that um we
[1:56:02] had a a good discussion in terms of
[1:56:05] community benefit agreement even the
[1:56:07] developer agreed with us to yes he is in
[1:56:11] favor of that so it would part that we
[1:56:13] kind of like put that together I yes
[1:56:15] time of the Ence it may assign it and
[1:56:17] submit it but then you know we can
[1:56:18] always revisit it and kind of submit
[1:56:20] something that is an agreement with us
[1:56:22] and also in agreement with the developer
[1:56:24] and I did mention that once we have the
[1:56:26] draft we then send it to them give them
[1:56:28] an opportunity for them to review it
[1:56:30] come back with any changes and we move
[1:56:32] forward with the um discussion and
[1:56:34] things like that with regards to the the
[1:56:37] sidewalk I mean that was another site it
[1:56:40] was done last year many of us don't
[1:56:43] can't even recall that side what project
[1:56:45] was done so there was a council member
[1:56:47] and me and his staff went ahead and did
[1:56:50] the the Calk program some of us were not
[1:56:52] even aware that it was ongoing yes I was
[1:56:54] initially involved in it at the
[1:56:56] beginning but I was totally sideline so
[1:56:58] you know and that was the reason why for
[1:57:00] the Central Central Park Way sidewalk
[1:57:03] I'm working with the mayor and his staff
[1:57:05] to make sure that we put every steps in
[1:57:06] place to make sure that we have the
[1:57:08] documentation the public hearing was
[1:57:10] called we have the documentation The
[1:57:12] Mailing and everything is going to be
[1:57:13] put in place to make sure that we do not
[1:57:15] go back what happened there should not
[1:57:17] have happened and but we as a council
[1:57:20] we're not we should not be taking blame
[1:57:21] for that
[1:57:24] right so um we're hearing what I'm
[1:57:25] hearing is that we'll get more
[1:57:26] information to the mayor and I would
[1:57:28] also suggest because um when Mr um
[1:57:30] Williams was talking he talking about
[1:57:32] different groups so maybe if we reach
[1:57:33] out to Sun because we need to expedite
[1:57:35] the process so we reach out to Sun and
[1:57:36] say you know the and then Sun reaches
[1:57:38] out to the neighborhoods so that we're
[1:57:40] not trying to um do this on short you
[1:57:44] know like drag out the process this
[1:57:46] Patrick well I hear what you all are
[1:57:48] saying um I think that I wish that
[1:57:52] I mean but this is now an executed an
[1:57:55] executed agreement so the work is going
[1:57:58] to start or has started I should say I
[1:58:01] think um I think that most of what we
[1:58:03] talked
[1:58:04] about when I did read the community
[1:58:07] benefits agreement that we received from
[1:58:08] the mayor's office is included in that
[1:58:11] agreement there were a couple of things
[1:58:13] that um I hear what you're saying about
[1:58:15] mwbe I mean I'm not really sure to what
[1:58:18] extent that I mean isn't that already
[1:58:21] like something that's already on the
[1:58:22] books in terms of mwb but I mean one of
[1:58:26] the things that um was mentioned was the
[1:58:28] internships just as one example of
[1:58:30] something that isn't in the existing
[1:58:32] signed Community benefits agreement
[1:58:35] which is already out there um but I
[1:58:38] think that you
[1:58:41] know that would be a great suggestion I
[1:58:43] don't think that we need to redraft
[1:58:45] another Community benefits agreement I
[1:58:47] guess is what I'm saying I think that
[1:58:49] having interns or you know some of these
[1:58:51] other things that we talk about are just
[1:58:53] good suggestions and I think we'd have
[1:58:55] to put some faith into the developer
[1:58:59] around around some of that we wouldn't
[1:59:00] even know I mean if there was
[1:59:02] internships for example we have to work
[1:59:03] with the school district to make sure
[1:59:05] that you know is it going to be students
[1:59:08] from the school district or is it going
[1:59:09] to be students from seccc I mean I don't
[1:59:11] those are kinds of things that I say we
[1:59:12] leave in the hands of the developer um
[1:59:16] with just the understanding that those
[1:59:17] are things that we hope will
[1:59:20] happen uh M fr
[1:59:22] May so I I think U again I think we um
[1:59:27] gave the mayor permission to act and he
[1:59:28] acted and I and I and I can appreciate
[1:59:31] that and I think that um we all are
[1:59:33] excited and anxious to get this project
[1:59:35] under way I was just caution us like I
[1:59:37] mean this isn't something where we want
[1:59:38] to like fight for our limitations for I
[1:59:39] mean if we have a a a working and
[1:59:42] willing partner who has expressed um
[1:59:45] that that they um uh Community benefits
[1:59:47] PES something that they value um and if
[1:59:50] they if they Mor it if the community can
[1:59:53] benefit more and we can make it official
[1:59:56] I mean the the developers uh agrees and
[1:59:59] I mean it's almost like you know why not
[2:00:01] do that you know what I mean if uh uh so
[2:00:04] I I I I do have faith um in the
[2:00:07] intentions of the developer I mean deep
[2:00:09] I was pretty impressed with his you know
[2:00:11] saying like hey just come up with
[2:00:13] something if it doesn't work you know I
[2:00:15] I would say that he might even kind of
[2:00:17] raise the threshold accountability to a
[2:00:18] level that we weren't so I I am pretty
[2:00:21] um uh I have a lot of faith there but I
[2:00:23] think that as a how we operate here is
[2:00:27] if we have a ready and willing partner
[2:00:29] to say you know what I can do that and
[2:00:31] that makes sense why not at it you know
[2:00:33] what I mean I don't think that holds up
[2:00:34] the pro the progress of the project any
[2:00:37] um so I think that
[2:00:40] that Mr M no I was going to Echo some
[2:00:44] something similar to Mr Farley is that
[2:00:46] um the developers we I mean some of the
[2:00:48] things he did mention and give us ideas
[2:00:51] to put in so the benefit agreement which
[2:00:53] you know came words that came from
[2:00:55] suggestion that came from him so I I
[2:00:57] think it would it would hurt it will go
[2:00:59] along way it will build more trust that
[2:01:02] U we discussed it we were told by the
[2:01:05] developer XYZ we should enact it and uh
[2:01:08] you know put it into the agreement and
[2:01:11] you know work along that line we can't
[2:01:14] just uh you know just say we have it for
[2:01:17] discussion we are back against um the
[2:01:20] timing of it yes if the timing is of the
[2:01:23] essence and the contract um needs to get
[2:01:25] signed and and deliver to move on it
[2:01:29] doesn't stop us from revisit um the
[2:01:32] benefit agreement and put these things
[2:01:33] in place it will go a long way it will
[2:01:36] go a long way in terms of building trust
[2:01:37] for the community and building trust for
[2:01:39] this developer going forward and all
[2:01:43] developers Mr Toro um I I thought that
[2:01:46] we were going to have uh some type of
[2:01:48] draft this evening um from the last uh
[2:01:51] someone was going to put things together
[2:01:53] what was set around the table so um I
[2:01:56] don't see anything presented but um I do
[2:01:59] know with the I I don't have the uh
[2:02:02] agreement here in front of me that the
[2:02:04] mayor put out there was some I think it
[2:02:06] it it emulated a lot of of what you put
[2:02:09] forward of what the community wanted um
[2:02:12] unfortunately you know there wasn't
[2:02:13] anything there about you know seats at
[2:02:15] the table um which I'm personally am not
[2:02:19] in agreement of but um since it's a
[2:02:22] going to be a privately run company but
[2:02:24] again I don't think whatever we bring
[2:02:26] forward I don't know if that all of us
[2:02:27] will agree on it anyway and we're just
[2:02:29] going to take time uh and the the the uh
[2:02:33] the agreements out there and and
[2:02:35] honestly I was pleased with with How It
[2:02:38] Was Written and and what it did for our
[2:02:39] community so so let me address something
[2:02:42] that you stated about there not being
[2:02:44] anything here well we had a meeting on
[2:02:46] Thursday and then in our Friday email we
[2:02:48] got it so to me there was no purpose of
[2:02:50] bringing here we need to have this
[2:02:51] discussion disc is is in terms of
[2:02:53] whether we going to move forward there
[2:02:55] was already an agreement I didn't know
[2:02:57] prior to this discussion that the mayor
[2:02:58] would still be open to doing that so
[2:03:00] that's why there's no draft here because
[2:03:02] we already got it in our email so I just
[2:03:04] want to make that 100% clear that it's
[2:03:07] not that we're dragging our feet we
[2:03:08] already got something that was we didn't
[2:03:10] want even aware that that existed so um
[2:03:15] that's why there there is no draft and
[2:03:17] now that we are clear that the mayor
[2:03:18] said it's a dynamic process and he's
[2:03:20] willing it open to that and developers
[2:03:22] as well then we can move forward with
[2:03:24] that but I didn't want to bring
[2:03:26] something just for us to when there was
[2:03:28] let didn't know there was a window of
[2:03:29] opportunity so now we know there's a
[2:03:31] window of
[2:03:32] opportunity Mr M if I may suggest that
[2:03:35] we should go back to the notes from the
[2:03:36] last meeting and absolutely create a
[2:03:38] draft we can do that and we can email it
[2:03:40] to the counil then give the opportunity
[2:03:42] to the developer and the mayor to view
[2:03:44] it and then we can bring it to the
[2:03:46] council say some the feedback we reive
[2:03:48] from the
[2:03:49] developer that and I and I short u
[2:03:52] information purposes there is another
[2:03:54] community meeting that's going on
[2:03:55] Thursday and um you know I'll just kind
[2:03:57] of discuss it if people have ideas you
[2:04:00] know I'll I'll throw them in there and
[2:04:01] they don't have to be good I mean they
[2:04:03] don't have to be good they don't
[2:04:03] necessarily have to be approved but we
[2:04:05] will have at least heard some level of
[2:04:07] community voice because I think
[2:04:09] Community benefits agreement deserves to
[2:04:11] have voices from the community so mayor
[2:04:14] you said so you're open to us putting
[2:04:16] something forward that we can have
[2:04:18] consideration okay perfect so can can we
[2:04:22] attach a timeline to that can we get
[2:04:24] this Draft before the week is out yes we
[2:04:26] can have the draft by I'll say Friday
[2:04:28] how's that today Tuesday yeah yes oh
[2:04:31] that's right holiday not a Monday so so
[2:04:35] um any if anyone there is anything that
[2:04:38] you mention at the meeting that you want
[2:04:39] include it please just um email it um I
[2:04:43] think everything's if you don't we'll
[2:04:44] email it to miss m and that way she has
[2:04:46] it in one it'll be in one place so that
[2:04:49] we're not emailing all around to each
[2:04:50] other and then Miku can then follow
[2:04:52] everything to all members of the
[2:04:54] council I know that we put a lot for all
[2:04:57] our things so thank you for the work
[2:04:58] that you do Mr
[2:05:00] Miku is there any further discussion on
[2:05:03] that okay once again I would to I I need
[2:05:07] to
[2:05:08] um recess City development plan and
[2:05:12] claims so that uh City development
[2:05:14] planning so that Claims can be
[2:05:16] called motion to recess second all those
[2:05:19] in favor
[2:05:23] okay so I'd like to open up claims go
[2:05:26] into executive section because
[2:05:28] it's she'll open then she'll vot exec
[2:05:32] session oh sorry oh
[2:05:37] good it's not me Carl I'm sorry it's
[2:05:40] Carl sorry about that Carl so I'd like
[2:05:43] to call to the claims committee we have
[2:05:45] one item on the agenda which we be
[2:05:46] taking executive session may have a
[2:05:48] motion to any executive session
[2:05:52] all in
[2:05:56] favor we're exec session and so the
[2:05:58] public will have to leave
[2:06:02] [Applause]